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 |  Agile Specification by Example |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  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. | 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 size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | 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 | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 5-20 min | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 3-6 | 3-20 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |