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 |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Agile Specification by Example |  Agile Planning 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. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 15-45 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 1-8 | 3-6 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |