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 |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | 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 two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 1-5 Tage | 15-45 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | Nutzertraffic | 1-3 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |