View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Working Agreements |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Agile Planning Poker |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tags1 shared | TeamCollaborationAgile | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
