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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for DACI
Decision Making
DACI
Purposedifferent
When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.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 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.In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-120 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-3 h30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
5-123-20 Reviewer5-302-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasDACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment
Add more methods