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 TRIZ |  Innovation Contradiction Analysis |  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. | 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 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 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-4 h | 60-120 min | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |