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 Mad Sad Glad |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible. | 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 a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 30-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 45–75 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 3-10 | 3-20 Reviewer | Team members involved |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | RetrospectiveTeamReflection | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam |