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 Double Diamond |  Agile Example Mapping |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For complex problems with a fuzzy situation, the method cleanly separates search space and decision. It first creates breadth in understanding and then focus in elaboration. This brings open questions, problem definition, and solution path into a traceable movement. | 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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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 | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-7 | 3-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |