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 Sailboat Retrospective
Agile
Sailboat Retrospective
Paper illustration for Mad Sad Glad
Agile
Mad Sad Glad
Paper illustration of a team retrospective with three separate Start, Stop, and Continue areas and a shared action list.
Agile
Start Stop Continue
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 wants to read momentum, brakes, and risks together, it offers an easily understandable picture of the situation. It makes drive, obstacles, and headwind visible in the same picture.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 a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung45-90 min30-60 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer4-123-103-12
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsSailboat Board, Risks, Improvement ActionsEmotion Board, Themes, Action ItemsStart Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
RetrospectiveTeamImprovement
RetrospectiveTeamReflection
RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection
Add more methods