View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Acceptance Criteria WorkshopFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisExample MappingSpecification by Example
| Criterion |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Agile Example Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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 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 | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 20-40 min pro Story | 2-6 h | 30-60 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 3-10 | 3-7 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |