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 |  Operations Process Mapping |  Agile NoEstimates |  Operations Theory of Constraints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 10-30 min je Item | 1-3 h | laufend | 2-4 h Analyse, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-10 | 2-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Constraint Map, Improvement Plan, Flow Metrics |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | ProcessOperationsImprovement | EstimationForecastingFlow | OperationsConstraintsFlowImprovement |