View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Problem InterviewStakeholder Salience ModelArchitecture Decision RecordProblem Framing Workshop
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Facilitation Problem Framing Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. | 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. | When a team works on symptoms but the real question stays fuzzy, a Problem Framing Workshop sharpens the view of the right problem. It separates observation, interpretation, and target picture from each other. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 60-90 min | 15-45 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-6 | 1-3 | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Problem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis Questions |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery |