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 |  Team Design Spotify Model Mapping |  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 landscape has grown without clear grouping, it maps roles and relationships onto the Spotify model. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Spotify model map and action list. | 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 5-15 | 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 | Spotify Model Map, Action List | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | TeamOrganizationAlignmentDiagnosis | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |