Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:Request for Comments Architecture Decision Record Spotify Model Mapping Team Topologies Interaction Modes

Criterion	Architecture Request for Comments	Architecture Architecture Decision Record	Team Design Spotify Model Mapping	Team Design Team Topologies Interaction Modes
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.	When a team landscape has grown without clear grouping, it maps roles and relationships onto the Spotify model. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Spotify model map and action list.	When several teams collaborate repeatedly, it describes the right interaction mode for each interface between them. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as an interaction heat map and pairwise agreements.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium
Timedifferent	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	15-45 min	90-180 min	Half day
Participantsdifferent	3-20 Reviewer	1-3	5-15	Team-Leads plus Architecture
Formatdifferent	Async	Async	Workshop	Workshop
Outputdifferent	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale	Spotify Model Map, Action List	Interaction Heat Map, Agreements per Pair
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance	TeamOrganizationAlignmentDiagnosis	TeamAlignmentCollaborationOrganization

Add more methods