View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |  Systems Thinking Rich Picture |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely. | 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. | A Rich Picture brings an unclear situation onto a shared drawing. It captures actors, tensions, information flows, and blind spots before the team jumps to solutions too early. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 60-90 min pro Feature | 30-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-6 | 2-10 | 3-7 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Rich Picture, Problem Framing Notes | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | Systems thinkingSoft systemsFramingVisualization | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |