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 Systems Mapping |  Agile Planning Poker |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Agile Ideal Days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. | 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 | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-5 min je Item | 2-4 h | 15-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-9 | 3-8 | 2-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | EstimationEffortAgile |