View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:PERT EstimationSpecification by ExampleFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisAcceptance Criteria Workshop
| Criterion |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Agile Specification by Example |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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 | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 2-6 h | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-6 | 3-10 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |