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
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 showing three sorted card stacks and an open question about a possible group.
UX Research
Card Sorting
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
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.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 content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations.For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
1-4 h3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional20-45 min2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
1-51 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 peopleBased on research question3-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component DiagramLean 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 checksContent groups, Label set, IA hypothesesFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Information architectureNavigationStructure
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods