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 |  Operations Runbook |  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. | For recurring operational tasks or incidents, the method keeps solid action logic ready. It reduces uncertainty when time pressure, role changes, or rare situations demand fast access. | 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 | 20-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | 1-3 | 1-4 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatsame | Async | Async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | ABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Runbook, Checklist, Escalation Path | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | OperationsReliabilityDocumentation | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |