View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Architecture C4 Model |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-4 h | 1-3 h | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-5 | 1-8 | 1-4 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |