View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Impact Filter |  Architecture arc42 |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With new ideas or requests, the conversation often turns to solutions too early and to effect too little. An Impact Filter forces the initiative into an effect perspective and checks whether it creates a relevant difference. | 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. | 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 | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 1-2 Tage | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Impact Filter, Success Criteria, Next Step | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | ImpactOutcomesFramingDecision | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |