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 |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Architecture C4 Model |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 45-90 min | 1-4 h | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-12 | 1-5 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ChangeDecisionStrategy | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |