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 Dot Voting |  Agile Three Amigos |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 5-15 min | 15-30 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 3-20 | 3 | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |