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 of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
A paper-based illustration representing C4 Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
C4 Model
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.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.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.When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min1-4 h15-45 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-201-51-35-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistContext Diagram, Container Diagram, Component DiagramADR File, Decision Log, RationaleRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods