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 |  Agile Bucket System |  Agile Planning Poker |  Decision Making Decision Rights 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. | When a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-90 min | 2-5 min je Item | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-12 | 3-9 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |