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 |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 15-45 min | 1-3 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 1-3 | 1-8 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |