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 SCAMPER |  Innovation Contradiction Analysis |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For an existing solution under pressure to change, the method deliberately opens space for systematic variants. It directs attention to rebuilding, combining, and repurposing rather than only new basic ideas. This produces concrete evolution paths for products, offerings, or workflows. | 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. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 30-60 min | 60-120 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 2-10 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | SCAMPER Idea List, Concept Shortlist, Variation Notes | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityReframingInnovation | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |