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 Visual Management |  Agile Ideal Days |  Agile NoEstimates |  Agile Planning Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With high tempo and many parallel topics, the method makes status, deviations, and priorities visible at a glance. It reduces search effort and prevents what matters from getting lost in daily work. | 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. | 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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Ongoing | 15-60 min | laufend | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 1-20 | 2-9 | 2-12 | 3-9 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Visual Board, Status Indicators, Exception Cues | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | SignalsOperationsVisual management | EstimationEffortAgile | EstimationForecastingFlow | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |