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 Strategy Execution Loop Decision Rights Mapping Architecture Decision Record

Criterion	Architecture Request for Comments	Business Strategy Strategy Execution Loop	Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping	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.	The Strategy Execution Loop helps avoid treating strategy as a one-off document. It makes visible how strategic decisions are turned into objectives, initiatives, operational work, measurement, and learning.	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.	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	High	Medium	Low
Timedifferent	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	Initial 3-6 h, then monthly or quarterly reviews	90-180 min	15-45 min
Participantsdifferent	3-20 Reviewer	5-12	4-12	1-3
Formatdifferent	Async	Workshop + async	Workshop	Async
Outputdifferent	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	Execution Loop, Review Cadence, Strategic Learning Log	Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tags1 shared	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	ExecutionCadenceLearningGovernance	DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance

Add more methods