View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Agile Example Mapping |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 30-60 min | 30-60 min | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 3-7 | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |