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 User Interviews |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 30–60 min per interview | 45-90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | SensemakingDecisionRationale |