View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Team Design Team API |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Architecture C4 Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | 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. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Half day initial, dann laufend | 15-45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 1-3 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Team API Document | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization |