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 |  Decision Making DACI |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 h | 30-60 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 1-8 | 2-10 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | SensemakingDecisionRationale | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |