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 Three Amigos |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  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. | 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. | 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 | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 15-30 min | 60-120 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 3 | 5-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |