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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |  Facilitation Alignment 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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-30 min | 60–90 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3 | 2-8 | 3-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |