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 |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Decision Making Red Teaming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. | For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 45-90 min | 1-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-8 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Challenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation Plan |
Tags1 shared | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | RiskDecisionSensemaking |