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 |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Decision Making DACI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 4-5 Tage | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-10 | 5-8 | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | InnovationPrototypeResearch | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment |