View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |  Agile Example Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 10-20 min | 30-60 min | 5-15 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 4-100+ | 3-7 | 3-20 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |