View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Start Stop Continue |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood. | 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. | 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 improvement options need to be sorted more finely than just start and stop, it brings observations into clear kinds of action. This makes visible what should be done more, less, newly, or continued. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Start Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments |
Tagsno overlap | RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam |