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 Story Points |  Operations Bottleneck Analysis |  Agile T-Shirt Sizing |  Agile Planning Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams want to rate complexity rather than hours, it creates a shared, relative scale. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Point Estimates, Reference Stories, and Velocity Data. | For a flow that backs up at one point, the method looks for the capacity limit with the greatest leverage. It explains why extra effort elsewhere barely improves throughput. | When effort only needs to be classified roughly, it makes comparability more important than false precision. It helps sort work quickly into manageable sizes. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | laufend, 1-5 min je Item | 1-3 h | 15-45 min | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-8 | 2-12 | 3-9 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Point Estimates, Reference Stories, Velocity Data | Bottleneck Map, Flow Metrics, Improvement Options, Follow-up Measures | Size Buckets, Rough Backlog Map, Split Candidates | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileMeasurement | FlowMeasurementConstraints | EstimationAgileRoadmap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |