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 |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Agile Example Mapping |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. | 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. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen je Sprint, laufend | 2-4 h | 30-60 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 (Scrum Team) | 3-8 | 3-7 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Increment, Sprint Goal | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | AgileIterationCadence | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |