View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Expectation MappingExample MappingTeam Topologies Interaction ModesSpecification by Example
| Criterion |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Agile Example Mapping |  Team Design Team Topologies Interaction Modes |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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 several teams collaborate repeatedly, it describes the right interaction mode for each interface between them. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as an interaction heat map and pairwise agreements. | 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 | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | Half day | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-7 | Team-Leads plus Architecture | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Interaction Heat Map, Agreements per Pair | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | TeamAlignmentCollaborationOrganization | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |