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 |  Business Strategy Balanced Scorecard |  Business Strategy Strategy Execution Loop |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Balanced Scorecard translates strategy into a few interconnected perspectives and metrics. It holds impact, steering, and learning together in daily work instead of narrowing strategy down to financial figures. | The Strategy Execution Loop helps avoid treating strategy as a one-off document. It makes visible how strategic decisions are turned into objectives, initiatives, operational work, measurement, and learning. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | Halber Tag bis mehrere Wochen | Initial 3-6 h, then monthly or quarterly reviews | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 | 5-12 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Balanced Scorecard, Strategic Measures, Initiative Map | Execution Loop, Review Cadence, Strategic Learning Log | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | StrategyMetricsExecution | ExecutionCadenceLearningGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |