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 Specification by Example |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Agile Example Mapping |  Systems Thinking Systems Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-5 Tage | 30-60 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 4-12 | 3-7 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange |