View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Delivery RAID Log |  DevOps Game Day |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | In preparing for rare incidents, the method tests response capability under controlled conditions. It shows where assumptions about stability, roles, and recovery are too optimistic. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | Halber Tag | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 5-20 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Simulation Notes, Gaps List, Updated Runbooks | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | ResilienceOperationsIncident | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |