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 Scrum |  Agile Example Mapping |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team needs to work in a fixed delivery rhythm, it stabilizes cadence, responsibility, and feedback loops. It makes collaboration reliable across sprint boundaries. | 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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | 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 | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen je Sprint, laufend | 30-60 min | 1-3 h | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 (Scrum Team) | 3-7 | 1-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Increment, Sprint Goal | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | AgileIterationCadence | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | SensemakingDecisionRationale | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |