View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Theory of Constraints |  Agile Story Points |  Agile NoEstimates |  Agile Ideal Days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For a system that does not get faster despite effort, the method directs attention to the bottleneck. It concentrates improvement on the point that actually limits throughput. | 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 estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | 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 | High | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h Analyse, laufend | laufend, 1-5 min je Item | laufend | 15-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-9 | 2-12 | 2-9 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Constraint Map, Improvement Plan, Flow Metrics | Point Estimates, Reference Stories, Velocity Data | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats |
Tagsno overlap | OperationsConstraintsFlowImprovement | EstimationAgileMeasurement | EstimationForecastingFlow | EstimationEffortAgile |