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 for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
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 Risk Storming.
Architecture
Risk Storming
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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.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.Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope30-60 min je Interview3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders5-12 Interviews1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people4-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsLean 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 checksAnnotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation
Add more methods