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