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 |  Facilitation 3-Circle Venn Diagram |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment 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 three perspectives matter at the same time, a Three-Circle Venn Diagram shows the overlaps and remainders precisely. It makes visible where shared effect arises and where only a partial perspective applies. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min | 60–90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-8 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Venn Diagram, Overlap Notes, Differentiators | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ComparisonFacilitationAlignment | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |