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 Six Thinking Hats |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|
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 topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 45-90 min | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | FacilitationOptionsDecision | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
