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 Strategy Execution Loop Architecture Inception Canvas

Criterion	Architecture Request for Comments	Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping	Business Strategy Strategy Execution Loop	Architecture Architecture Inception 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 Strategy Execution Loop helps avoid treating strategy as a one-off document. It makes visible how strategic decisions are turned into objectives, initiatives, operational work, measurement, and learning.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Medium	High	Low
Timedifferent	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	90-180 min	Initial 3-6 h, then monthly or quarterly reviews	1-2 h
Participantsdifferent	3-20 Reviewer	4-12	5-12	3-8
Formatdifferent	Async	Workshop	Workshop + async	Workshop
Outputdifferent	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement	Execution Loop, Review Cadence, Strategic Learning Log	Inception Canvas, Risks, Goal List, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility	ExecutionCadenceLearningGovernance	AlignmentArchitectureCanvas

Add more methods