View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations ABC Analysis |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Product Strategy ICE Scoring |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention. | 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 ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 15-45 min | 30-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | 1-3 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | ABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | ICE Table, Top Idea List | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |