View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture C4 Model |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | 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. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 15-45 min | 1-4 h | Mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 1-3 | 1-5 | 2-6 researchers plus sample |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative |