View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research User Interviews |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture arc42 |  Architecture C4 Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 h | 1-2 Tage | 1-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 1-8 | 1-4 | 1-5 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization |