View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Agile Example Mapping |  Operations Accountability Ladder |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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. | With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on. | 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 | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | 20-45 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-7 | 1-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |