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 Request for Comments |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  Architecture arc42 |  UX Design Customer Journey Canvas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. | When a journey needs to be understood across several phases, it arranges experience, touchpoints, and opportunities into one picture. It makes gaps and friction along the user path clear. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 2-4 h | 1-2 Tage | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-10 | 1-4 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Customer Journey Canvas, Pain Points, Experience Opportunities |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | JourneyServiceService design | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | JourneyCustomerService designCanvas |