View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery Shape Up |  Operations Change Analysis |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | For a deviation after a change, the method isolates the influence of the altered condition. It narrows down which differences are relevant and which are just accompanying noise. | 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 an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 45-120 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-6 | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Change Matrix, Cause Hypotheses, Validation Questions, Action List | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries |
Tagsno overlap | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | ChangeRoot causeTroubleshootingComparison | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions |