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 Story Points |  Agile Example Mapping |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams want to rate complexity rather than hours, it creates a shared, relative scale. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Point Estimates, Reference Stories, and Velocity Data. | 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. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend, 1-5 min je Item | 30-60 min | 2-5 min je Item | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-7 | 3-9 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Point Estimates, Reference Stories, Velocity Data | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileMeasurement | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |