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 Planning Poker |  Agile Example 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 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 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 | 2-5 min je Item | 30-60 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-9 | 3-7 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |