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 Assumption Surfacing |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Trade-off Analysis |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 15-45 min | 45-120 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-3 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Trade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted Downsides | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |