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 |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Delivery Cost of Delay |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | CoD Table, Prioritization Sequence |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
