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 |  Architecture Views and Beyond |  Delivery Communication Plan |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | Views and Beyond organizes architecture into several views so no single diagram has to do everything at once. This makes it possible to choose the representation that fits the stakeholder's question. | When many people need to be informed in parallel and messages would otherwise arrive unevenly or too late, a Communication Plan orders communication reliably. Channels, audiences, and cadences interlock so important information doesn't get lost. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-3 Tage | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-4 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Architecture Views, Cross-view Notes, Rationale | Communication Plan, Channel Matrix, Message Cadence |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | DocumentationStakeholdersArchitecture | CommunicationStakeholdersDeliveryPlanning |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
