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
Software Architecture Canvas method illustration showing its working structure
Architecture
Software Architecture Canvas
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.The Software Architecture Canvas reduces a system to the most important architecture decisions, constraints, and interfaces. It is useful when teams need a resilient overall picture quickly.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung45-90 min1-3 h1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer3-125-303-10
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasArchitecture Canvas, Goals, Constraints, Quality Attributes
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
DecisionRolesGovernance
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
CanvasArchitectureAlignmentWorkshop
Add more methods