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 Three Amigos |  Agile Working Agreements |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 story, test, and implementation could drift apart, it brings business perspective, engineering, and quality together early. It prevents a story from being read differently only late in the process. | When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 15-30 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3 | 3-12 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | TeamCollaborationAgile | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |