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 |  Innovation Contradiction Analysis |  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 system should improve while another measure suffers as a result, the method makes the underlying conflict precisely formulable. It separates the desired effect from its side effect. This makes solutions possible that address the contradiction deliberately instead of half-heartedly. | 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 | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 60-120 min | 1-4 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |