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
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
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
For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.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 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
HighMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-4 h1-3 h1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-82-83-20 Reviewer1-3
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Challenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap
RiskDecisionSensemaking
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Add more methods