View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 90-180 min | 20-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | Based on research question | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | Information architectureNavigationStructure | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
