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
A paper-based illustration representing C4 Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
C4 Model
Incident Command workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
DevOps
Incident Command
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 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
Purposedifferent
The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes.During an acute incident with several people involved, the method creates a clear leadership and communication structure. It reduces chaos when fast coordination and clean situational awareness are both needed at once.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.For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-4 hAs needed3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
1-54-151 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people2-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component DiagramIncident Log, Action Tracker, Stakeholder UpdatesLean 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 checksRoot cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization
IncidentOperationsReliability
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
Add more methods