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 Six Thinking Hats |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 20-40 min pro Story | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-6 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationOptionsDecision | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
