Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:Empathy Mapping ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)arc42 Architecture Decision Record

Criterion	UX Research Empathy Mapping	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Architecture arc42	Architecture Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent	When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing.	ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification.	arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Medium	Low	Low
Timedifferent	30–60 min	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	1-2 Tage	15-45 min
Participantsdifferent	4-8	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	1-4	1-3
Formatdifferent	Workshop	Workshop + async	Workshop + async	Async
Outputdifferent	Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap	SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance

Add more methods