View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Quality Attribute Workshop |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Architecture Risk Storming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | A Quality Attribute Workshop translates quality requirements into concrete scenarios and architecture impulses. The method brings product, engineering, and operations to the same view of desired properties. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 30–60 min | Mehrere Wochen | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-15 | 4-8 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Quality Scenarios, Priority List, Architecture Concerns | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | RequirementsArchitectureWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation |