View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Personas |  Agile Specification by Example |  Agile Working Agreements |  Facilitation Team Charter |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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 collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | When a team is starting fresh or working past each other, Team Charter clarifies the shared working basis. It visibly sets out how collaboration, decision paths, and mutual conduct should work day to day. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 60-90 min pro Feature | 45-90 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 3-6 | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Team Charter, Working Norms, Role Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | TeamCollaborationAgile | TeamAlignmentCollaboration |