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 RecordOpportunity Solution TreeAssumption SurfacingRequest for Comments
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  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 discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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 | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 45-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 2-6 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |