View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Agile Ideal Days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely. | 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. | When effort needs to be thought of as real working time, it offers a simple common denominator for comparison. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, and Capacity Caveats. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30-90 min | 5-20 min | 15-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-20 | 2-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationEffortAgile |