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
A paper-based illustration representing WSJF with its core stages and visible working result.
Agile
WSJF
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration of an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Purposedifferent
When many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min15-45 min1-3 h1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung
Participantsdifferent
3-101-32-83-20 Reviewer
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsADR File, Decision Log, RationaleIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets
Tagsno overlap
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
Add more methods