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 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 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 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 |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 4-12 | 3-7 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | FacilitationOptionsDecision | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
