View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely. | When an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |