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 |  Architecture Request for Comments |  UX Research User Interviews |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30–60 min per interview | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |