View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Example Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 4-12 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
