Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:Strategy Execution Loop Assumption Surfacing Request for Comments Architecture Decision Record

Criterion	Business Strategy Strategy Execution Loop	Decision Making Assumption Surfacing	Architecture Request for Comments	Architecture Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent	The Strategy Execution Loop helps avoid treating strategy as a one-off document. It makes visible how strategic decisions are turned into objectives, initiatives, operational work, measurement, and learning.	Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it.	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	High	Low	Medium	Low
Timedifferent	Initial 3-6 h, then monthly or quarterly reviews	45-90 min	1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung	15-45 min
Participantsdifferent	5-12	2-8	3-20 Reviewer	1-3
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop + async	Async	Async
Outputdifferent	Execution Loop, Review Cadence, Strategic Learning Log	Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan	RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap	ExecutionCadenceLearningGovernance	AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery	ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance

Add more methods