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
Design sheets and interface cards connect to jointly written pseudocode with highlighted unresolved questions.
Architecture
ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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)
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
Purposedifferent
ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional60-90 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
Designers, developers as users, and facilitation4-101 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people2-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisionsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentLean 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 checksRoot cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
Add more methods