View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Example Mapping |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | 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. | 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 a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 90-180 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 20-40 min pro Story |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | 4-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development |