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 Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
Paper illustration for DACI
Decision Making
DACI
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent
When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice.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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min30-60 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-102-103-20 Reviewer1-3
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsDACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision LogRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Add more methods