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 Customer Journey Mapping |  Architecture arc42 |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately. | 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. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 1-2 Tage | 1-2 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 1-4 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | JourneyServiceService design | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |