View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Customer Journey MappingConstraint AnalysisRequest for CommentsArchitecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 30-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | JourneyServiceService design | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |