Planning Poker vs T-Shirt Sizing: Which is Better?
Compare planning poker and t-shirt sizing estimation methods to find the best approach for your agile team. Learn when to use each technique, their pros and cons, and how to combine both methods effectively.
Planning Poker vs T-Shirt Sizing: Which is Better?
Ever sat through hour-long debates about whether a story is 8 or 13 points? Or watched your team get paralyzed by overly complex estimation? You're not alone.
Two estimation techniques dominate agile teams: planning poker and t-shirt sizing. Each shines in different scenarios, and the right choice transforms sprint planning from painful to productive.
This guide breaks down both methods so you can pick—or combine—the approach that fits your team's needs.
What is Planning Poker?
Planning poker is a consensus-based technique where team members use numbered cards to estimate user stories. Developed by James Grenning and popularized by Mike Cohn, it captures the entire team's wisdom while preventing the loudest voice from dominating.
How Planning Poker Works
The process is straightforward:
- Story Presentation: Product owner presents a user story
- Discussion: Team asks clarifying questions
- Private Selection: Each participant picks a card
- Simultaneous Reveal: Everyone shows their card at once
- Consensus Building: People with highest and lowest estimates explain their reasoning
- Re-estimation: Team votes again until consensus emerges
Planning Poker Card Values
Most teams use the Modified Fibonacci sequence: 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 20, 40, 100. These gaps grow larger as values increase, mirroring the uncertainty inherent in estimating complex work.
Some teams swap numbers for t-shirt sizes (XS, S, M, L, XL), blending planning poker's structure with t-shirt sizing's simplicity.
What is T-Shirt Sizing?
T-shirt sizing uses familiar clothing sizes (XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL) to categorize work by effort or complexity. It's faster and more intuitive than numbers, making it ideal for quick estimates or stakeholder conversations.
How T-Shirt Sizing Works
The process is simple:
- Establish Baseline: Pick a reference story everyone agrees is "Medium"
- Relative Comparison: Compare new items to the baseline
- Quick Categorization: Brief discussion, fast agreement
- Grouping: Stories grouped by size for planning
T-Shirt Size Meanings
Typical definitions:
- XS: Trivial changes, simple bug fixes
- S: Simple features, minimal development time
- M: Standard features, moderate complexity
- L: Complex features, significant effort
- XL: Major features needing breakdown
- XXL: Epics requiring substantial planning
Planning Poker vs T-Shirt Sizing: Direct Comparison
Here's how the methods stack up:
| Aspect | Planning Poker | T-Shirt Sizing |
|---|---|---|
| Precision | Higher (numerical values) | Lower (broad categories) |
| Time per Story | 2-5 minutes | 30 seconds to 2 minutes |
| Best Use | Sprint planning, detailed estimation | Roadmap planning, initial triage |
| Learning Curve | Moderate (story points concept) | Low (everyone knows sizes) |
| Team Size | 4-8 people | Scales to 10+ people |
| Consensus | Structured iterative voting | Quick discussion |
| Output | Story points (numbers) | Categories (ordinal) |
| Velocity Tracking | Built-in | Requires conversion |
| Math Operations | Can sum and average | Limited without conversion |
| Stakeholder Communication | Needs explanation | Instantly intuitive |
Pros and Cons: Planning Poker
Advantages
Higher Accuracy Through Consensus
The iterative discussion surfaces hidden complexities. When a developer estimates 13 while a tester estimates 3, the conversation reveals critical insights that improve the final number.
Engages Everyone
Simultaneous card reveal prevents loud voices from dominating. Junior developers get equal say with senior members, improving both estimate quality and team buy-in.
Promotes Knowledge Sharing
When people explain their reasoning, others learn about technical approaches, potential pitfalls, and system architecture. Planning poker teaches beyond just producing numbers.
Enables Velocity Tracking
Numerical story points let teams calculate velocity and use historical data for capacity planning. You can answer "Can we deliver these 10 stories?" with data-driven confidence.
Appropriate Granularity
The Fibonacci sequence prevents false precision while maintaining useful distinctions. No debates about 11 vs 12 points, but clear differences between 8 and 13.
Disadvantages
Time-Intensive
For backlogs with dozens of stories, 3-5 minutes per story adds hours to planning. This investment isn't always justified.
Complexity for New Teams
Teams new to agile struggle with story points vs hours. Understanding that 5 points isn't "5 hours of work" requires a mindset shift.
Difficult with Large Teams
Beyond 8-10 participants, reaching consensus becomes unwieldy. More voices lead to longer discussions and harder convergence.
Can Feel Like Over-Engineering
For straightforward work, planning poker's structure may feel unnecessarily formal. Sometimes the ceremony overshadows the actual work.
Requires Calibration
New teams need several sprints to calibrate what point values mean. Initial estimates are often wildly off.
Pros and Cons: T-Shirt Sizing
Advantages
Speed and Simplicity
Teams can estimate dozens of items in the time planning poker handles a handful of stories. Perfect for large backlogs or early planning when precision isn't critical.
Intuitive for Everyone
Everyone gets t-shirt sizes instantly—no explanation needed. This makes it accessible to stakeholders, new members, and non-technical participants.
Reduces Analysis Paralysis
Limited categories prevent overthinking. No debates about 11 vs 12 because those distinctions don't exist. Teams make quick judgments and move on.
Scales Well
When planning quarters or years ahead, you might need to estimate hundreds of features. T-shirt sizing makes this feasible where planning poker would be prohibitive.
Easier Cross-Team Comparison
While story points vary between teams, t-shirt sizes maintain more consistent meaning. A "Large" feature means substantial work regardless of which team estimates it.
Disadvantages
Lower Precision
Broad categories provide less granular information than numbers. A "Medium" could cover a wide range of actual effort, making capacity planning less predictable.
Limited Math Operations
You can't add up sizes to calculate capacity. Converting "2 Larges, 3 Mediums, and 5 Smalls" requires an extra conversion step or rough guess.
May Skip Critical Discussions
Speed cuts both ways. Teams might rush through without surfacing dependencies, risks, or implementation details that would emerge during planning poker.
Challenging Velocity Tracking
Without numbers, calculating velocity is difficult. Teams must convert sizes to points (losing simplicity) or track velocity less precisely.
Can Mask Calibration Drift
As team composition or technology changes, what constitutes "Medium" might shift unnoticed. Lack of concrete numbers makes drift harder to detect.
When to Use Planning Poker
Planning poker excels when precision matters:
Sprint Planning
For stories you're committing to this sprint, the accuracy justifies the time. The consensus process identifies blockers before you commit.
Complex Technical Work
Stories with significant technical complexity, architectural decisions, or cross-system integration need planning poker's deep discussion. Diverse perspectives surface hidden complexity.
Velocity Tracking
If you use historical velocity for forecasting, you need numerical data. Story points enable data-driven commitments.
Multi-Discipline Stories
When a story touches frontend, backend, QA, and DevOps, planning poker ensures all perspectives inform the estimate. Nothing gets overlooked.
New Teams
Teams learning to estimate benefit from hearing reasoning explained. This calibrates understanding and builds skills.
When to Use T-Shirt Sizing
T-shirt sizing shines when speed matters more than precision:
Initial Backlog Refinement
Quickly categorize large backlogs or new requests into rough buckets. This prioritizes which items deserve deeper analysis.
Roadmap Planning
For quarterly or annual planning with many features, t-shirt sizing provides sufficient granularity while maintaining efficiency. Stakeholders understand relative scope without story point details.
High-Level Prioritization
Product owners make quick decisions. A "Large" feature with low business value gets deprioritized for "Small" high-value items.
Stakeholder Communication
Non-technical stakeholders instantly grasp "3 Large and 7 Medium features" better than "85 story points."
Large Teams
With 10+ participants, planning poker consensus becomes unwieldy. T-shirt sizing lets larger groups estimate without endless discussion.
Time-Boxed Sessions
Fixed time window? T-shirt sizing ensures you complete the session without sacrificing coverage.
Combining Both Methods: A Hybrid Approach
Smart teams don't choose—they use both at different workflow stages.
The Two-Phase Strategy
Use t-shirt sizing for triage, planning poker for detail:
Phase 1: T-Shirt Sizing for Backlog Grooming
Quickly categorize new items to:
- Identify elephants (XXL items needing breakdown)
- Group similar-sized items
- Provide rough roadmap scope
- Prioritize what needs deep analysis
Phase 2: Planning Poker for Sprint Planning
When items enter sprint planning, planning poker provides:
- Detailed implementation understanding
- Numerical points for velocity tracking
- Team consensus on commitment
- Clear blocker identification
Converting Sizes to Points
Rough conversion guidelines:
- XS = 1-2 points
- S = 3-5 points
- M = 8-13 points
- L = 20-40 points
- XL = 40+ points (needs breakdown)
These aren't rigid formulas—just guideposts for translating categories into planning poker starting points.
Progressive Refinement
Match estimation method to readiness level:
- Discovery: Ideas get t-shirt sizes
- Backlog Refinement: Potential candidates get planning poker with t-shirt sizes
- Sprint Planning: Sprint-ready stories get Fibonacci planning poker
This progression matches precision to understanding and commitment required.
Choosing the Right Method for Your Team
Consider these factors:
Team Maturity
New agile teams benefit from t-shirt sizing's simplicity before progressing to planning poker. Experienced teams might find planning poker's structure less necessary.
Planning Horizon
Sprint planning benefits from planning poker's precision. Roadmaps work better with t-shirt sizing's speed.
Team Size
4-8 people? Planning poker works great. 10+ people? T-shirt sizing maintains momentum better.
Stakeholder Involvement
Non-technical stakeholders in planning? T-shirt sizing communicates clearly. Teams working independently can optimize for internal efficiency with either method.
Organizational Culture
Metrics-focused organizations value planning poker's numerical output. Lightweight-process companies prefer t-shirt sizing.
Tools for Planning Poker and T-Shirt Sizing
Digital tools streamline estimation for remote and hybrid teams.
Planning Poker supports both methods:
- Fibonacci sequences, t-shirt sizes, or Powers of 2
- Switch estimation scales based on context
- No account creation required for participants
- Track estimation history automatically
- Import unestimated issues from Linear
Dedicated tools remove friction, letting your team focus on discussion instead of mechanics.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Watch out for these pitfalls with both methods:
Over-Estimating for Safety
Inflating estimates to build in buffer hides actual capacity and prevents accurate forecasting. Trust your estimates and track where you're consistently wrong rather than padding everything.
Estimating in Hours
Both methods use relative estimation, not time. A 5-point story isn't "5 hours of work." Mixing time and effort creates confusion and kills the benefits of relative sizing.
Skipping Discussion
The discussion is often more valuable than the estimate itself. Don't rush through just to generate numbers—use it for team alignment.
One-Person Estimation
When one person (usually a tech lead) estimates for everyone, you lose diverse perspectives, team buy-in, and calibration benefits. Estimation is a team activity.
Never Revisiting Estimates
Estimation improves with practice. Regularly review completed work against original estimates to identify patterns and calibrate future estimations.
The Verdict: Which is Better?
There's no universal answer—the better choice depends on your context.
Choose Planning Poker When:
- Estimating immediate sprint work
- Tracking velocity for capacity planning
- Stories involve significant complexity
- You need numerical precision for forecasting
- Team size is 4-8 people
Choose T-Shirt Sizing When:
- Planning roadmaps or release schedules
- Estimating large backlogs quickly
- Working with large teams or non-technical stakeholders
- Initial triage of new items
- Speed matters more than precision
Consider a Hybrid Approach When:
- Handling both strategic planning and sprint execution
- Want broad categorization first, detail later
- Different stakeholders need different granularity
- Balancing efficiency with accuracy
The most successful teams treat estimation methods as tools, not religions. Use planning poker when benefits justify time. Use t-shirt sizing when speed provides more value. Experiment—your ideal approach might uniquely combine both.
Getting Started with Better Estimation
Ready to improve? Start here:
-
Identify Pain Points: Estimates taking too long? Inaccurate? Stakeholders confused? Different problems need different solutions.
-
Experiment: Try planning poker one sprint, t-shirt sizing the next. Compare results and team satisfaction.
-
Stay Consistent: Consistent application matters more than perfect technique.
-
Track and Improve: Review completed work against estimates to calibrate over time.
-
Use the Right Tools: Platforms like Planning Poker eliminate friction so your team focuses on discussion, not mechanics.
Estimation's goal isn't perfection—it's shared understanding and informed planning. Choose what helps your team collaborate effectively and deliver consistently.