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 for Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
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 two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Purposedifferent
Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain.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.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
1-5 Tage3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional15-45 minPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
4-121 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people1-3Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanLean 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 checksADR File, Decision Log, RationaleDomain 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
Tagsno overlap
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
Add more methods