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 Specification by Example |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-6 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
