View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Architecture Decision RecordUser InterviewsProblem Framing WorkshopStakeholder Salience Model
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  UX Research User Interviews |  Facilitation Problem Framing Workshop |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a team works on symptoms but the real question stays fuzzy, a Problem Framing Workshop sharpens the view of the right problem. It separates observation, interpretation, and target picture from each other. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 30–60 min per interview | 60-120 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 1 participant per interview | 4-10 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Problem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis Questions | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |