View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Process Mapping |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Agile Planning Poker |  Operations After-Action Review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | 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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30-90 min | 2-5 min je Item | 20-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-12 | 3-9 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessOperationsImprovement | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | LearningOperationsImprovement |