methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration for ABC Analysis
Operations
ABC Analysis
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Purposedifferent
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.With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention.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.When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
15-45 min30-60 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
1-31-53-20 Reviewer1-8
Formatdifferent
AsyncAsyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
ADR File, Decision Log, RationaleABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control ListRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods