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 Empathy Mapping |  Operations 5 Whys |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 30–60 min | 15-30 min | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 4-8 | 2-6 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |