View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  UX Research Tree Testing |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When a navigation exists but search paths still fail, tree testing checks findability without visual distraction. The method shows whether labels, levels, and paths really lead to the intended destination. | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 1-2 Tage | 20-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | Based on research question | Based on research question | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | Information architectureNavigationFindability | Information architectureNavigationStructure | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |