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 Opportunity Interview |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture C4 Model |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | 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. | When the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 15-45 min | 1-4 h | 30-60 min je Interview |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 1-3 | 1-5 | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation |