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 |  Team Design Team Topologies Interaction Modes |  Agile Working Agreements |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When several teams collaborate repeatedly, it describes the right interaction mode for each interface between them. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as an interaction heat map and pairwise agreements. | When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | laufend, 1-5 min je Item | Half day | 45-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | Team-Leads plus Architecture | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Point Estimates, Reference Stories, Velocity Data | Interaction Heat Map, Agreements per Pair | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileMeasurement | TeamAlignmentCollaborationOrganization | TeamCollaborationAgile | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam |