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 T-Shirt Sizing |  Facilitation Team Charter |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Working Agreements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 a team is starting fresh or working past each other, Team Charter clarifies the shared working basis. It visibly sets out how collaboration, decision paths, and mutual conduct should work day to day. | 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 collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 2-4 h | 2-5 min je Item | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 3-12 | 3-9 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Size Buckets, Rough Backlog Map, Split Candidates | Team Charter, Working Norms, Role Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRoadmap | TeamAlignmentCollaboration | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | TeamCollaborationAgile |