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 |  Innovation TRIZ |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | When a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-4 h | 30-60 min | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 2-8 | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |