View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile NoEstimates |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Decision Making DACI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | 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. | In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | laufend | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-3 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-8 | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment |