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 Cost of Delay |  Product Strategy ICE Scoring |  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. | Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence. | When ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | 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 | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min | 30-60 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-8 | 2-8 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | CoD Table, Prioritization Sequence | ICE Table, Top Idea List | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |