View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Starbursting |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Innovation Solo Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify ideas, open questions, and testable next steps in concrete terms. It opens the thinking space, collects ideas, and leads to testable options. The result is captured as a star-shaped question map, question list, and assumption list. | 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. | For an individual thinking problem with no counterpart immediately available, the method creates a protected space for one's own approaches. It prevents outside opinions from narrowing thinking too early. This lets ideas mature before they go into a group format. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min | 15-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 | 1 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Personal Idea List, Sketches or Mind Map, Pre-Read for Group Session |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | BrainstormingIdeationAsync |