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 |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Decision Making DACI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment |