View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |  Systems Thinking CATWOE Analysis |  Agile Example Mapping |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way. | 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 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 | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-8 | 3-7 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |