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 Planning Poker |  Agile Specification by Example |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-2 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-6 | 4-12 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |