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 Discovery Jobs to Be Done |  Decision Making Impact Filter |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought. | 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. | 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 Wochen | 20-45 min | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 1-6 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity List | Impact Filter, Success Criteria, Next Step | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | CustomerOutcomesNeeds | ImpactOutcomesFramingDecision | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |