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 Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |