View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Growth Funnel Analysis |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When many visitors or users drop off along the way, the reason behind the number often stays hidden. Funnel Analysis exposes these transitions and makes visible exactly where the path collapses. | 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. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 15-45 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | 1-3 | 1-8 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Funnel report, Drop-off analysis, Optimization hypotheses | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | AnalyticsConversionGrowth | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |