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 |  Agile NoEstimates |  Decision Making Delphi Method |  Decision Making Wideband Delphi |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together. | A single opinion rarely holds up for planning when the future is genuinely uncertain. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as an Estimate Range, Assumption Log, and Expert Consensus Notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | laufend | 1-4 Wochen | 1-4 h or multiple rounds |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 2-12 | 6-30 Experten | 4-12 Experten |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes | Estimate Range, Assumption Log, Expert Consensus Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationForecastingFlow | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy | EstimationExpertsForecasting |