View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Three-Point Estimation |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 10-30 min je Item | 5-20 min | 1-3 h | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-20 | 1-8 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | EstimationEffortRisk | SensemakingDecisionRationale | EstimationUncertaintyRisk |