View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | For a critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 2-6 h | 15-45 min | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 3-8 | 1-3 | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | RiskRoot causeSafety | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |