View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Innovation Design Charrette |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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. | 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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 | 10-50 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation |