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.

Selected:Delphi MethodRisk MatrixRequest for CommentsLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Criterion
Anonymous individual judgments pass through feedback loops to form a distribution.
Decision Making
Delphi Method
Paper illustration of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
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)
Purposedifferent
When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together.When a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-4 Wochen30-60 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
6-30 Experten3-103-20 Reviewer1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption NotesRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsLean 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 checks
Tagsno overlap
ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods