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 Working Agreements |  Team Design Team API |  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 collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | 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 | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 45-90 min | Half day initial, dann laufend | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 3-12 | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Team API Document | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | TeamCollaborationAgile | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |