Compare

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 Inception Canvas Decision Rights Mapping Request for Comments Architecture Communication Canvas

Criterion	Architecture Architecture Inception Canvas	Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping	Architecture Request for Comments	Architecture Architecture Communication Canvas
Purposedifferent	The Architecture Inception Canvas bundles the first architecture questions into a compact decision picture. It fits when an initiative is still in motion but still needs clear guardrails.	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.	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.	The Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Medium	Medium	Medium
Timedifferent	1-2 h	90-180 min	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	60-120 min
Participantsdifferent	3-8	4-12	3-20 Reviewer	2-8
Formatdifferent	Workshop	Workshop	Async	Workshop + async
Outputdifferent	Inception Canvas, Risks, Goal List, Open Questions	Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	Communication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication Plan
Tagsno overlap	AlignmentArchitectureCanvas	DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas

Add more methods