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 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
Paper illustration for DACI
Decision Making
DACI
Paper illustration for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Purposedifferent
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.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.In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung15-45 min30-60 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer1-32-103-12
Formatdifferent
AsyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsADR File, Decision Log, RationaleDACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision LogRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision Log
Tags1 shared
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment
DecisionRolesGovernance
Add more methods