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 for Kepner-Tregoe
Operations
Kepner-Tregoe
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
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.For a disturbance that's hard to pin down, the method cleanly separates problem, cause, and decision. It reduces mixing when symptoms allow several interpretations.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
MediumMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-3 h2-8 h15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer1-82-81-3
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleProblem Analysis, Decision Analysis, Risk PlanADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Problem solvingRoot causeDecisionOperations
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Add more methods