View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Specification by ExampleDecision Rights MappingRequest for CommentsArchitecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | 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 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. | 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 | 60-90 min pro Feature | 90-180 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 4-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |