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 an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
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 Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Purposedifferent
IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus.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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h15-45 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
2-81-33-20 Reviewer1-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesADR File, Decision Log, RationaleRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods