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 |  Engineering Golden Path |  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 teams need a reliable default path for frequent use, sprawl quickly emerges without any guiding logic. Golden Path bundles the preferred path so good practice becomes easy and deviation becomes deliberate. | 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 | 1-3 Tage Setup, laufend | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-3 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Golden Path Guide, Templates, Quality Checks | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | EngineeringProductivityGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |