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 |  Innovation Brainstorming |  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. | 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. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-60 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |