View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Value Stream MappingDecision Rights MappingArchitecture Decision RecordRequest for Comments
| Criterion |  Delivery Value Stream Mapping |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  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. | 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. | 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 | 1-3 h | 90-180 min | 15-45 min | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 4-12 | 1-3 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Current-state map, Future-state map, Bottleneck list | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | LeanFlowWasteDelivery | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |