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 RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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.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 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.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 Entscheidung45-90 min1-3 h60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer3-125-304-10
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
DecisionRolesGovernance
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods