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 Problem Interview |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | 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. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |