View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Team Charter |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture arc42 |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team is starting fresh or working past each other, Team Charter clarifies the shared working basis. It visibly sets out how collaboration, decision paths, and mutual conduct should work day to day. | 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. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-2 Tage | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-4 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Team Charter, Working Norms, Role Notes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCollaboration | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |