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 |  Agile Example Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | 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. | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-60 min | 15-45 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-7 | 1-3 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |