View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture C4 Model |  Agile NoEstimates |  Decision Making Delphi Method |  Product Strategy DIBB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | laufend | 1-4 Wochen | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | 2-12 | 6-30 Experten | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | EstimationForecastingFlow | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |