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 Mad Sad Glad
Agile
Mad Sad Glad
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
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 a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible.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 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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung30-60 min1-3 h60-180 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer3-101-84-20
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsEmotion Board, Themes, Action ItemsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleCynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
RetrospectiveTeamReflection
SensemakingDecisionRationale
ComplexitySensemakingDecision
Add more methods