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 Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Delivery RAID Log |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | RAID Log, Status Report Source | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |