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 Personas |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 2-4 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 4-10 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | JourneyServiceService design | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
