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
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
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
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.For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h30-90 min15-45 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung
Participantsdifferent
2-81-61-33-20 Reviewer
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListADR File, Decision Log, RationaleRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets
Tagsno overlap
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
DecisionTreeOptions
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
Add more methods