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 NoEstimates |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | laufend | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 2-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | EstimationForecastingFlow | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |