View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Mind Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. | 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 | 15-45 min | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale |