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 |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |  Agile Example Mapping |  Agile Three Amigos |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | 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. | When story, test, and implementation could drift apart, it brings business perspective, engineering, and quality together early. It prevents a story from being read differently only late in the process. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-3 Wochen | 30-60 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-7 | 3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | UX researchObservationContext | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement |