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 Systems Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |  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. | Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen je Sprint, laufend | 1-3 h | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 (Scrum Team) | 3-12 | 3-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Increment, Sprint Goal | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | AgileIterationCadence | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |