View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Radar |  Agile Example Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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 | 1-2 h | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 3-7 | 2-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |