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 Software Architecture Canvas |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | The Software Architecture Canvas reduces a system to the most important architecture decisions, constraints, and interfaces. It is useful when teams need a resilient overall picture quickly. | 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. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-2 h | 15-45 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-10 | 1-3 | 5-30 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Architecture Canvas, Goals, Constraints, Quality Attributes | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | CanvasArchitectureAlignmentWorkshop | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |