View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Agile Mad Sad Glad |  Architecture Architecture Communication Canvas |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | The Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 30-60 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
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 | Communication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication Plan |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | RetrospectiveTeamReflection | ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
