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 |  Agile Example Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | 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. | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 30-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 3-7 | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |