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 Mad Sad Glad |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|
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 team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible. | When improvement options need to be sorted more finely than just start and stop, it brings observations into clear kinds of action. This makes visible what should be done more, less, newly, or continued. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-10 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | RetrospectiveTeamReflection | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
