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 Rights Mapping |  UX Research Card Sorting |  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. | 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. | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min | 20-45 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 | Based on research question | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | Information architectureNavigationStructure | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |