View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Specification by ExampleStandard Work AnalysisFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisExample Mapping
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Operations Standard Work Analysis |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  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 the same task is done differently depending on the person, the method exposes the reliable core. It creates comparability without unnecessarily choking off needed latitude. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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 | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-3 h | 2-6 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 2-6 | 3-10 | 3-7 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | LeanProcessQuality | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |