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 |  Engineering Kanban |  Agile Three Amigos |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 sits in too many parallel streams, throughput suffers and no one sees the bottlenecks. Kanban makes the flow of work visible and limits overload so a system becomes calmer and more predictable. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | Ongoing | 15-30 min | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 2-12 | 3 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Kanban board, WIP policies, Flow metrics | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | FlowVisual managementDelivery | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | ForecastingFlowDelivery |