View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Expectation MappingSAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)Team Topologies Interaction Modes
| Criterion |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Team Design Team Topologies Interaction Modes |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning. | When several teams collaborate repeatedly, it describes the right interaction mode for each interface between them. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as an interaction heat map and pairwise agreements. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | Half day |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | Team-Leads plus Architecture |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives | Interaction Heat Map, Agreements per Pair |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | TeamAlignmentCollaborationOrganization |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
