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 |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy. | 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. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | Half day | 30-90 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Leverage Map, Action Strategy | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |