View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Innovation SCAMPER |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | For an existing solution under pressure to change, the method deliberately opens space for systematic variants. It directs attention to rebuilding, combining, and repurposing rather than only new basic ideas. This produces concrete evolution paths for products, offerings, or workflows. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | SCAMPER Idea List, Concept Shortlist, Variation Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityReframingInnovation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
