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 Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |