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 |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  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. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-60 min | 90-180 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-7 | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |