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 Contextual Inquiry |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation. | For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 2-5 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
