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 |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Architecture Risk Storming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-3 h | 45-60 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-8 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation |