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 Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting.
Engineering
Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
30-240 min60-90 min15-45 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
1-64-101-35-30
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis SummaryProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentADR File, Decision Log, RationaleConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods