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 Planning Poker.
Agile
Planning Poker
Paper illustration for DACI
Decision Making
DACI
Paper illustration for Affinity Estimation.
Agile
Affinity Estimation
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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions.In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated.When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung2-5 min je Item30-60 min30-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer3-92-103-12
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsRelative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split CandidatesDACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision LogAffinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam
DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
Add more methods