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 ExampleRequest for CommentsArchitecture Communication CanvasArchitecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Communication Canvas |  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. | 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 Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design. | 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 | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 60-120 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 3-20 Reviewer | 2-8 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Communication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication Plan | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |