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 Decision Tree |  Architecture arc42 |  Architecture C4 Model |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 1-2 Tage | 1-4 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 1-4 | 1-5 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionTreeOptions | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |