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 Team Topologies Interaction Modes Spotify Model Mapping

Criterion	Architecture Request for Comments	Architecture Architecture Decision Record	Team Design Team Topologies Interaction Modes	Team Design Spotify Model Mapping
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 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.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium
Timedifferent	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	15-45 min	Half day	90-180 min
Participantsdifferent	3-20 Reviewer	1-3	Team-Leads plus Architecture	5-15
Formatdifferent	Async	Async	Workshop	Workshop
Outputdifferent	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale	Interaction Heat Map, Agreements per Pair	Spotify Model Map, Action List
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance	TeamAlignmentCollaborationOrganization	TeamOrganizationAlignmentDiagnosis

Add more methods