View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation TRIZ |  Agile Specification by Example |  Innovation SCAMPER |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | 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. | For an existing solution under pressure to change, the method deliberately opens space for systematic variants. It directs attention to rebuilding, combining, and repurposing rather than only new basic ideas. This produces concrete evolution paths for products, offerings, or workflows. | When a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | 60-90 min pro Feature | 30-60 min | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-6 | 2-10 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | SCAMPER Idea List, Concept Shortlist, Variation Notes | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityReframingInnovation | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |