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 |  Team Design Spotify Model Mapping |  Team Design Team API |
|---|---|---|---|
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 landscape has grown without clear grouping, it maps roles and relationships onto the Spotify model. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Spotify model map and action list. | When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 90-180 min | Half day initial, dann laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 5-15 | Ein Team plus Stakeholder |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Spotify Model Map, Action List | Team API Document |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | TeamOrganizationAlignmentDiagnosis | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
