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 |  Decision Making Wideband Delphi |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Decision Making Delphi Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 1-4 h or multiple rounds | 5-20 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 4-12 Experten | 3-20 | 6-30 Experten |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Estimate Range, Assumption Log, Expert Consensus Notes | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationExpertsForecasting | EstimationEffortRisk | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy |