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 |  Decision Making Option Framing |  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 early decisions, alternatives are often still vague, incomplete, or blended together. Option Framing brings every possibility into a comparable form and makes visible which variant actually fits the question. | 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 | 45-120 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 3-8 | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Option Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision Inputs | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison | ChangeDecisionStrategy | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |