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 Specification by Example |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Innovation TRIZ |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | 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 | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 20-40 min pro Story | 1-4 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 3-6 | 2-8 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |