View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Delivery RAID Log |  Agile ROAM Board |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | When work needs to move between different states or columns, it makes that movement and its handoffs legible. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a ROAM Board and an Owner List. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 20-40 min initial, dann laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-15 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | RAID Log, Status Report Source | ROAM Board, Owner List |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | RiskAgileTrackingAlignment |