View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Quality Attribute Workshop |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Decision Making RAPID |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | A Quality Attribute Workshop translates quality requirements into concrete scenarios and architecture impulses. The method brings product, engineering, and operations to the same view of desired properties. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 45–90 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 5-15 | 3-10 | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Quality Scenarios, Priority List, Architecture Concerns | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | RAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision Log | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | RequirementsArchitectureWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | DecisionRolesGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |