View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Delivery RAID Log |  Decision Making RAPID |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels. | ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 45-90 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-12 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | RAID Log, Status Report Source | RAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision Log | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | DecisionRolesGovernance | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |