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 Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration for ALPEN Method
Operations
ALPEN Method
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
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.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.With an overloaded day full of too many tasks, a realistic picture of the day emerges. The method connects estimating, deciding, and buffer thinking so planning fits available energy and time.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
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
15-45 min1-3 h10-20 min daily1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung
Participantsdifferent
1-31-813-20 Reviewer
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
ADR File, Decision Log, RationaleArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleDaily Plan, Time Estimates, Review NotesRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
PlanningTime managementProductivityOperations
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
Add more methods