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 Three Amigos |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Agile Example Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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 two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 15-30 min | 45-60 min | 30-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3 | 2-8 | 3-7 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |