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 the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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 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 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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-3 h45-90 min60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer5-303-124-10
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
DecisionRolesGovernance
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods