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:Architecture Decision Record Smoke Test ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)A/B Testing

Criterion	Architecture Architecture Decision Record	Product Discovery Smoke Test	Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)	Growth A/B Testing
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.	When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all.	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 two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Low	High	High
Timedifferent	15-45 min	1-5 Tage	Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope	1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent	1-3	Nutzertraffic	Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders	1-6
Formatdifferent	Async	Async	Workshop + async	Async
Outputdifferent	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale	Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note	Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations	Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance	ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth	ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders	ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation

Add more methods