View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Team Design Team API |  Architecture C4 Model |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Half day initial, dann laufend | 1-4 h | 2-4 h | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 1-5 | 4-10 | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Team API Document | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | JourneyServiceService design | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |