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 |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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 | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 60-120 min | 5-15 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 5-12 | 3-20 | 3-7 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |