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 Design Design Studio |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Example Mapping |  Agile Working Agreements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several designs need to be quickly put in relation to each other, it makes ideas visible and comparable. It encourages early variants instead of long upfront debates. | 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. | When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-5 min je Item | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-9 | 3-7 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Sketches, Concept Directions, Design Decisions | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence |
Tagsno overlap | SketchingCollaborationIdeation | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | TeamCollaborationAgile |