View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Strategy ICE Scoring |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | ICE Table, Top Idea List | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale |