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 Double Diamond |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For complex problems with a fuzzy situation, the method cleanly separates search space and decision. It first creates breadth in understanding and then focus in elaboration. This brings open questions, problem definition, and solution path into a traceable movement. | 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. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 15-45 min | 60-180 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-3 | 4-20 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ComplexitySensemakingDecision | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |