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 Decision Matrix |  Decision Making Decision Framing Workshop |  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 several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | When a decision is poorly framed, even good answers deliver little value. A Decision Framing Workshop sharpens the problem, goal, and boundaries before the actual weighing begins. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 45-90 min | 60-120 min | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-8 | 4-10 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence Plan | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |