View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Specification by ExampleFishbone DiagramAcceptance Criteria WorkshopFailure Mode and Effects Analysis
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Operations Fishbone Diagram |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 problem has several possible contributing factors, the method sorts causes by cause areas. It prevents an initial hunch from blocking the view of other plausible drivers. | 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 a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 30-60 min | 20-40 min pro Story | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 2-8 | 3-6 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Fishbone Diagram, Cause Categories, Investigation Backlog | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | Root causeQualityOperations | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |