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
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
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
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.When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer.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
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h45–90 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
2-83-103-20 Reviewer1-3
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Add more methods