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 |  Agile Specification by Example |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-30 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-4 Wochen | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3 | 3-6 | 1-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |