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 Scrum |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Agile Planning Poker |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team needs to work in a fixed delivery rhythm, it stabilizes cadence, responsibility, and feedback loops. It makes collaboration reliable across sprint boundaries. | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen je Sprint, laufend | 45-90 min | 2-5 min je Item | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 (Scrum Team) | 3-12 | 3-9 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Increment, Sprint Goal | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileIterationCadence | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |