View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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. | 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. | When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ComplexitySensemakingDecision |