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 |  Agile Three Amigos |  Innovation TRIZ |  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 story, test, and implementation could drift apart, it brings business perspective, engineering, and quality together early. It prevents a story from being read differently only late in the process. | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | 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 | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 15-30 min | 1-4 h | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 3 | 2-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |