methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Contextual Inquiry.
UX Research
Contextual Inquiry
Three Amigos method illustration showing its working structure
Agile
Three Amigos
Paper illustration for Working Agreements.
Agile
Working Agreements
Paper illustration of Acceptance Criteria Workshop with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Agile
Acceptance Criteria Workshop
Purposedifferent
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 story, test, and implementation could drift apart, it brings business perspective, engineering, and quality together early. It prevents a story from being read differently only late in the process.When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen15-30 min45-90 min20-40 min pro Story
Participantsdifferent
4-12 Beobachtungen33-123-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain PointsClarified Story, Test Examples, Open QuestionsWorking Agreements, Team Norms, Review CadenceAcceptance Criteria, Story Update
Tagsno overlap
UX researchObservationContext
CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement
TeamCollaborationAgile
AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development
Add more methods