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 |  Delivery Communication Plan |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|
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 many people need to be informed in parallel and messages would otherwise arrive unevenly or too late, a Communication Plan orders communication reliably. Channels, audiences, and cadences interlock so important information doesn't get lost. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-6 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Communication Plan, Channel Matrix, Message Cadence | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | CommunicationStakeholdersDeliveryPlanning | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
