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 |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Innovation Design Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | Mehrere Wochen | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
