Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:Request for Comments Spotify Model Mapping Team Topologies Interaction Modes Architecture Decision Record

Criterion	Architecture Request for Comments	Team Design Spotify Model Mapping	Team Design Team Topologies Interaction Modes	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.	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 several teams collaborate repeatedly, it describes the right interaction mode for each interface between them. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as an interaction heat map and pairwise agreements.	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	Medium	Medium	Low
Timedifferent	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	90-180 min	Half day	15-45 min
Participantsdifferent	3-20 Reviewer	5-15	Team-Leads plus Architecture	1-3
Formatdifferent	Async	Workshop	Workshop	Async
Outputdifferent	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	Spotify Model Map, Action List	Interaction Heat Map, Agreements per Pair	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	TeamOrganizationAlignmentDiagnosis	TeamAlignmentCollaborationOrganization	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance

Add more methods