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 |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Architecture C4 Model |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30–60 min | 1-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-8 | 1-5 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
