Planning Poker vs. Async Poker: Which is better for Agile teams?

[#1]

Agile teams rely on estimation to plan better, prioritize work, and deliver efficiently. But how teams estimate can make all the difference.

Two popular methods lead the way: Planning Poker, the classic real-time approach, and Async Poker, a modern twist that fits today’s distributed teams. Both aim to build shared understanding—but they do it in slightly different ways.

Let’s explore what each method looks like, where they shine, and which might fit your team best.

What Is Planning Poker (Synchronous Planning Poker)?

Planning Poker is a real-time estimation game used by Agile teams to decide how much effort a task or user story might take. It’s simple, structured, and highly collaborative.

Here’s how it works:

1. The Product Owner or Scrum Master presents a story or task.
2. The team asks questions to clarify what’s required.
3. Each member selects a card (or a number in an app) privately, usually following the Fibonacci sequence (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13…).
4. Everyone reveals their estimate simultaneously, keeping it fair and bias-free.
5. If the votes differ, the team discusses the reasoning behind the high and low numbers.
6. After clarifying, the team votes again until they reach an agreement.

This method encourages open discussion, collaboration, and shared understanding. It’s fun, democratic, and effective for identifying risks early—while ensuring every voice is heard.

In short: Planning Poker helps teams align fast, communicate openly, and estimate accurately. The main downside? It can be time-consuming and tricky to organize for distributed teams.

What Is Async Poker (Asynchronous Planning Poker)?

Async Poker follows the same idea—but without the need for everyone to be in the same meeting. It’s built for remote or hybrid teams that want flexibility without sacrificing collaboration.

Here’s how a typical async session runs:

1. The facilitator shares a set of stories with clear descriptions.
2. Team members review and submit their estimates independently, at any time that suits them.
3. Once everyone has voted, the results are revealed.
4. If estimates differ widely, the facilitator triggers an async discussion—or a short follow-up call—to align on a final estimate.

Async Poker keeps estimation moving smoothly even when people are in different time zones. It gives space for deeper individual reflection, reduces meeting fatigue, and helps teams stay productive without constant scheduling battles.

It’s efficient, flexible, and perfect for modern, distributed teams—but it may lose some of the real-time collaboration that makes Planning Poker engaging.

Key Differences Between Planning Poker and Async Poker

Both approaches aim for accurate, shared estimates. The difference lies in how teams interact, communicate, and make decisions.

Let’s look at the major differences that matter most in practice.

Interaction Style

Planning Poker thrives on real-time discussion. Everyone is present, actively sharing insights, asking questions, and resolving misunderstandings immediately. This back-and-forth builds strong alignment and team chemistry.

Async Poker, by contrast, is quieter and more structured. Conversations happen through written comments or chat threads. It’s efficient—but lacks the spontaneity of live exchanges, where great ideas often surface.

Scheduling and Flexibility

Scheduling is where Async Poker wins easily. Planning Poker depends on getting everyone in the same meeting—a challenge for global or hybrid teams.

Async Poker lets people estimate whenever they can. No more struggling with time zones or finding overlapping hours. For teams spread across continents, this flexibility is a huge benefit.

Team Engagement

Planning Poker feels social and lively. The shared card reveal, debates, and laughter make estimation more than just a task—it becomes team bonding.

Async Poker can be more solitary. While it’s efficient, it risks feeling mechanical if not managed well. Adding small touches—like comments, reactions, or short sync follow-ups—helps keep engagement alive.

Speed and Efficiency

Speed can go both ways.

Planning Poker gives instant results: discuss, vote, decide, done. It’s great for small or moderate backlogs. But long sessions can drag when there are many items to estimate.

Async Poker spreads estimation across time. Team members can chip away at stories gradually, without blocking each other. It’s slower in turnaround but lighter on meeting fatigue—especially for larger backlogs.

Communication and Alignment

In Planning Poker, misunderstandings are addressed instantly. If something’s unclear, someone speaks up, and the team sorts it out right away. That’s a big advantage for complex projects or when stories aren’t fully defined.

Async Poker takes more patience. Communication is written, and clarifications may take several exchanges. It works best when the team already has strong async habits and clear documentation.

Best Fit by Team Type

Planning Poker works best for co-located or hybrid teams who value collaboration and real-time discussion. It’s especially great for newer teams learning to estimate together.

Async Poker fits distributed or global teams who prioritize flexibility and focus time. It’s ideal for mature Agile teams comfortable with asynchronous communication.

Which Is Better for Agile Teams?

So, which one wins? 

It depends entirely on your team’s setup, communication style, and workflow.

If your team loves live collaboration, Planning Poker is hard to beat. It builds trust, fosters learning, and helps people align faster. That’s why it’s still the most popular choice among Agile teams worldwide—it strengthens both understanding and relationships.

If your team is remote, constantly on the move, or tired of endless meetings, Async Poker offers freedom and flow. It makes estimation more flexible without sacrificing inclusivity or fairness.

In fact, many teams now blend both. They estimate asynchronously first, then hold a short live session to discuss only the stories with big differences. This hybrid model saves time while preserving the collaborative benefits of live discussion.

When choosing, ask yourself:

• Do we value real-time discussion more than flexibility?
• Are we struggling with scheduling across time zones?
• Is our backlog small and manageable—or large and growing?

The answers will tell you which approach fits your team best. 

Try the hybrid approach directly in Jira with AgileBox, where you can set up a Planning Poker session in advance, giving everyone the opportunity to review work details before the meeting, and then discuss and finalize estimates together.

Conclusion

Planning Poker and Async Poker share the same goal: helping Agile teams estimate more effectively through collaboration. They just take different paths to get there.

• Planning Poker brings energy, teamwork, and real-time clarity.
• Async Poker brings flexibility, focus, and inclusivity for remote teams.

Neither is universally better—it’s about what works best for your team’s rhythm. Try both, adapt, and keep evolving.

Because in Agile, the best estimation method isn’t the fastest or the trendiest—it’s the one that helps your team communicate, collaborate, and deliver with confidence.