View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:RAID LogAcceptance Criteria WorkshopFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisSpecification by Example
| Criterion |  Delivery RAID Log |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 20-40 min pro Story | 2-6 h | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-6 | 3-10 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |