View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Agile Example Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30-60 min | 60–90 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-7 | 2-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |