View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Engineering Golden Path |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When teams need a reliable default path for frequent use, sprawl quickly emerges without any guiding logic. Golden Path bundles the preferred path so good practice becomes easy and deviation becomes deliberate. | 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 | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 45–90 min | 1-3 Tage Setup, laufend | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 3-10 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Golden Path Guide, Templates, Quality Checks | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | EngineeringProductivityGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |