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 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Paper illustration for Root Cause Analysis.
Operations
Root Cause Analysis
Purposedifferent
For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description.LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail.SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning.When a problem keeps recurring and the cause stays unclear, the method exposes the underlying mechanism. It separates symptom, guess, and robust explanation from one another.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
15-30 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additionalPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope1-4 h
Participantsdifferent
2-61 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 peopleArchitecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting3-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Root cause notes, CountermeasuresLean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checksDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesProblem Statement, Cause Hypotheses, Confirmed Causes, Action Plan
Tagsno overlap
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
Root causeProblem solvingQualityIncident
Add more methods