View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Architecture Decision RecordDecision Rights MappingForce Field AnalysisRequest for Comments
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  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. | 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 change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 90-180 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | ChangeDecisionStrategy | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |