View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Planning Poker |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 1-3 h | 30-90 min | 5-20 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | KnowledgeMappingRisk | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationEffortRisk |