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 |  Innovation 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. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
