View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Agile Specification by Example |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice. | 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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 2-5 min je Item | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-6 | 3-9 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |