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 Golden Circle |  Operations RACI Matrix |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In positioning and communication, what an offering actually stands for often becomes blurred. The Golden Circle sharpens a product's inner rationale and connects purpose, approach, and offering into a clear statement. | With unclear responsibilities across several roles or areas, the method creates unambiguous accountability logic. It reduces friction because decision, execution, contribution, and information become separately visible. | 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. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Why Statement, Messaging Notes, Positioning Draft | RACI Matrix, Responsibility Map, Decision Notes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | MarketingPositioningCommunication | RolesResponsibilityGovernanceOperations | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |