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: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper session grid with two time blocks, three rooms, colored session cards and an open topic pool.
Facilitation
Barcamp
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 for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
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 many people can contribute knowledge and the flow should stay open, Barcamp provides a framework for self-organized sessions. The format channels energy without defining the content too narrowly in advance.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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scopeHalber Tag bis 2 Tage3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders15-2001 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people4-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsSession Board, Session Notes, Community LearningsLean 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 checksAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
FacilitationLarge groupLearning
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods