View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Trade-off AnalysisDecision Framing WorkshopArchitecture Decision RecordRequest for Comments
| Criterion |  Decision Making Trade-off Analysis |  Decision Making Decision Framing Workshop |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects. | When a decision is poorly framed, even good answers deliver little value. A Decision Framing Workshop sharpens the problem, goal, and boundaries before the actual weighing begins. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-120 min | 60-120 min | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-10 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Trade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted Downsides | Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence Plan | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions | Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |