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 |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making DACI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment |