View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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. | 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 | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45–90 min | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-10 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |