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)
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 Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door Test
Paper illustration of a Learning Card with four fields for hypothesis, observation, insight, and action.
Product Discovery
Learning Card
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.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 demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small.The Learning Card connects traceable test results to a reasoned next action while keeping the limits of the insight visible.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-5 Tage25-40 min
Participantsdifferent
Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 peopleNutzertraffic1-5
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsLean 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 checksClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning DecisionLearning Card with evidence and next action
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryLearning
Add more methods