View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Innovation Brainwriting |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | When loud voices or hierarchy distort the idea search, the method creates a quiet entry into joint development. It gives everyone thinking space and gathers contributions without social brakes, making diversity more visible and easier to build on. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 15-30 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Idea sheets, Expanded concepts, Prioritized list | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | BrainstormingCollaborationInclusionIdeas | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |