View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Business Strategy Strategy Execution Loop |  Agile Scrum |  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. | When a team needs to work in a fixed delivery rhythm, it stabilizes cadence, responsibility, and feedback loops. It makes collaboration reliable across sprint boundaries. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Initial 3-6 h, then monthly or quarterly reviews | 1-4 Wochen je Sprint, laufend | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 3-10 (Scrum Team) | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Execution Loop, Review Cadence, Strategic Learning Log | Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Increment, Sprint Goal | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ExecutionCadenceLearningGovernance | AgileIterationCadence | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |