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 for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration for Cynefin Workshop.
Decision Making
Cynefin Workshop
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.When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-3 h60-90 min60-180 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer1-84-104-20
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentCynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes
Tags1 shared
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
ComplexitySensemakingDecision
Add more methods