Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)Mad Sad Glad 4Ls Retrospective Start Stop Continue

Criterion	Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)	Agile Mad Sad Glad	Agile 4Ls Retrospective	Agile Start Stop Continue
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 team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible.	When a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time.	When a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood.
Complexitydifferent	High	Low	Low	Low
Timedifferent	Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope	30-60 min	45–75 min	30-60 min
Participantsdifferent	Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders	3-10	Team members involved	3-12
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop	Workshop
Outputdifferent	Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations	Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items	4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions	Start Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders	RetrospectiveTeamReflection	RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam	RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection

Add more methods