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 Voting |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Agile NoEstimates |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 10-30 min je Item | 5-15 min | 60-120 min | laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-20 | 5-12 | 2-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | EstimationForecastingFlow |