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
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
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 of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
Purposedifferent
When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.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.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.When a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 hPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
1-8Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesLean 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 checksRisk Matrix, Top Risk List
Tagsno overlap
SensemakingDecisionRationale
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
Add more methods