View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Failure Mode and Effects AnalysisLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Risk Storming
| Criterion |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Architecture Risk Storming |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Lean 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 | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog |
Tags1 shared | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
