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 illustration of the Lotus Blossom working structure.
Innovation
Lotus Blossom
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 paper-based illustration representing Brainstorming with its core stages and visible working result.
Innovation
Brainstorming
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 a central question feels too large, the method breaks it into neighboring topic fields with their own depth of ideation. It holds structure and openness at the same time, so adjacent perspectives don't get lost. This grows an idea space out of a core problem.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 team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development.
Complexitydifferent
HighLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope45-90 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders3-101 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 investigationsLotus Diagram, Idea Themes, ShortlistLean 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 checksIdea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
BrainstormingIdeationCreativityDivergenceWorkshop
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence
Add more methods