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 Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  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. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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 | Medium |
Timedifferent | 20-40 min pro Story | 45-90 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 3-10 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
