Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:A3 Problem Solving Start Stop Continue ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)Mad Sad Glad

Criterion	Operations A3 Problem Solving	Agile Start Stop Continue	Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)	Agile Mad Sad Glad
Purposedifferent	For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together.	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.	ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Low	High	Low
Timedifferent	45-90 min	30-60 min	Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope	30-60 min
Participantsdifferent	2-5	3-12	Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders	3-10
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop + async	Workshop
Outputdifferent	A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis	Start Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions	Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations	Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items
Tagsno overlap	LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations	RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection	ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders	RetrospectiveTeamReflection

Add more methods