View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Kanban |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Delivery Cost of Delay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work sits in too many parallel streams, throughput suffers and no one sees the bottlenecks. Kanban makes the flow of work visible and limits overload so a system becomes calmer and more predictable. | 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. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. | Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | Ongoing | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Kanban board, WIP policies, Flow metrics | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | CoD Table, Prioritization Sequence |
Tagsno overlap | FlowVisual managementDelivery | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision |