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 an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Paper illustration of Decision Rights Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Decision Making
Decision Rights Mapping
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
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.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.In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement.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.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-3 h90-180 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer2-84-121-8
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesDecision Rights Matrix, AgreementArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tags1 shared
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods