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 Mad Sad Glad
Agile
Mad Sad Glad
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration of a team retrospective with three separate Start, Stop, and Continue areas and a shared action list.
Agile
Start Stop Continue
Paper illustration for Sailboat Retrospective
Agile
Sailboat Retrospective
Purposedifferent
When a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible.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 a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood.When a team wants to read momentum, brakes, and risks together, it offers an easily understandable picture of the situation. It makes drive, obstacles, and headwind visible in the same picture.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
30-60 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung30-60 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-103-20 Reviewer3-124-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Emotion Board, Themes, Action ItemsRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsStart Stop Continue Board, Improvement ActionsSailboat Board, Risks, Improvement Actions
Tagsno overlap
RetrospectiveTeamReflection
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection
RetrospectiveTeamImprovement
Add more methods