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
Paper illustration of Five-Minute VC Check with its method-specific working model.
Business Strategy
5-Minuten VC-Check
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 of Lean Startup with its method-specific working model.
Innovation
Lean Startup
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Purposedifferent
The 5-Minute VC Check clarifies opportunities and strategic options at the earliest idea stage. It compares problem quality, customer willingness to pay, alternatives, differentiation, and market potential, and captures the result as a VC-check note, go/sharpen/park decision, and risk list.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 uncertain business assumptions, the method forces the idea into contact with real market reactions early. It separates wishful picture, assumption, and observable behavior, so that learning becomes faster than planning. This translates uncertainty into measurable insight.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
LowMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
5-15 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additionalWochen bis Monate je LernzyklusSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
1-51 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people2-8Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
VC-check note, Go/sharpen/park decision, Risk and assumption list, Next validation stepLean 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 checksHypothesis list, MVPs, Learning reports, Pivot or persevere decisionPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations
Tagsno overlap
StartupValidationCompetition
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
LeanStartupValidationMVP
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods