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 |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-3 h | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-8 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |