Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:Request for Comments Decision Rights Mapping Architecture Inception Canvas Architecture Communication Canvas

Criterion	Architecture Request for Comments	Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping	Architecture Architecture Inception Canvas	Architecture Architecture Communication Canvas
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.	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.	The Architecture Inception Canvas bundles the first architecture questions into a compact decision picture. It fits when an initiative is still in motion but still needs clear guardrails.	The Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Medium	Low	Medium
Timedifferent	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	90-180 min	1-2 h	60-120 min
Participantsdifferent	3-20 Reviewer	4-12	3-8	2-8
Formatdifferent	Async	Workshop	Workshop	Workshop + async
Outputdifferent	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement	Inception Canvas, Risks, Goal List, Open Questions	Communication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication Plan
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility	AlignmentArchitectureCanvas	ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas

Add more methods