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 Team Charter |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a team is starting fresh or working past each other, Team Charter clarifies the shared working basis. It visibly sets out how collaboration, decision paths, and mutual conduct should work day to day. | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 2-4 h | 30-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantssame | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Team Charter, Working Norms, Role Notes | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | TeamCollaborationAgile | TeamAlignmentCollaboration | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam |