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 Affinity Estimation |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |  Agile Example Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 1-3 Wochen | 30-60 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-7 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | UX researchObservationContext | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |