View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Contradiction Analysis |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a system should improve while another measure suffers as a result, the method makes the underlying conflict precisely formulable. It separates the desired effect from its side effect. This makes solutions possible that address the contradiction deliberately instead of half-heartedly. | 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 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 | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 20-40 min pro Story | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-6 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
