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 for DACI
Decision Making
DACI
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
A paper-based illustration representing arc42 with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
arc42
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Purposedifferent
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.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.arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.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
30-60 min1-3 h1-2 Tage1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung
Participantsdifferent
2-101-81-43-20 Reviewer
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision LogArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleArchitecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment ViewRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets
Tagsno overlap
DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment
SensemakingDecisionRationale
ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
Add more methods