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 |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Business Strategy McKinsey 7S |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | McKinsey 7S checks whether Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Skills, Style, and Staff fit together. Organizational misalignments become visible across multiple levers as a result. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min | 45-90 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | 7S Assessment, Alignment Gaps, Change Actions |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | ChangeDecisionStrategy | OrganizationStrategyAlignmentChange |