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 |  Decision Making Red Teaming |  Decision Making DACI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments. | In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-3 h | 1-4 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-8 | 3-8 | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Challenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation Plan | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log |
Tags1 shared | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale | RiskDecisionSensemaking | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment |