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 |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale. | When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. | 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 | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 60-180 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-20 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ComplexitySensemakingDecision | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |