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 Views and Beyond |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Views and Beyond organizes architecture into several views so no single diagram has to do everything at once. This makes it possible to choose the representation that fits the stakeholder's question. | 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 problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-3 Tage | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1-4 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Architecture Views, Cross-view Notes, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | DocumentationStakeholdersArchitecture | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ComplexitySensemakingDecision |