methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
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.In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels.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
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
15-45 min30–60 min per interview45-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
1-31 participant per interview3-121-8
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
ADR File, Decision Log, RationaleInterview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
DecisionRolesGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods