View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |  Agile Three Amigos |  Agile Working Agreements |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 15-30 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3 | 3-12 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | TeamCollaborationAgile | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |