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 Request for Comments |  Operations 5 Whys |  Operations Change Analysis |  Operations Kepner-Tregoe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. | For a deviation after a change, the method isolates the influence of the altered condition. It narrows down which differences are relevant and which are just accompanying noise. | For a disturbance that's hard to pin down, the method cleanly separates problem, cause, and decision. It reduces mixing when symptoms allow several interpretations. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-30 min | 45-120 min | 2-8 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-6 | 2-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Change Matrix, Cause Hypotheses, Validation Questions, Action List | Problem Analysis, Decision Analysis, Risk Plan |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | ChangeRoot causeTroubleshootingComparison | Problem solvingRoot causeDecisionOperations |