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 Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting.
Engineering
Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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 systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
15-45 min30-240 min1-3 h60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1-31-65-304-10
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
ADR File, Decision Log, RationaleHypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis SummaryConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods