View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery Value Stream Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When delivery work dissolves into wait times, handoffs, and hidden effort, Value Stream Mapping makes the actual flow visible. The method exposes bottlenecks, idle time, and feedback loops so lead time and improvement levers become tangible. | 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. | When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. | 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 | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 15-45 min | 60-180 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 1-3 | 4-20 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Current-state map, Future-state map, Bottleneck list | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | LeanFlowWasteDelivery | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ComplexitySensemakingDecision | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |