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 of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration for DACI
Decision Making
DACI
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.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.In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
15-45 min1-3 h1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
1-31-83-20 Reviewer2-10
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
ADR File, Decision Log, RationaleArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsDACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment
Add more methods