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 |  Delivery RAID Log |  Growth A/B Testing |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 1-4 Wochen | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 1-6 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |