View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Architecture Decision RecordQuality Attribute WorkshopConsensus WorkshopStakeholder Salience Model
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture Quality Attribute Workshop |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | A Quality Attribute Workshop translates quality requirements into concrete scenarios and architecture impulses. The method brings product, engineering, and operations to the same view of desired properties. | 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 stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 2-4 h | 1-3 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 5-15 | 5-30 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Quality Scenarios, Priority List, Architecture Concerns | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | RequirementsArchitectureWorkshop | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |