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 a journey map with four connected phases, several experience lanes and a point marked for closer investigation.
UX Research
Customer Journey Mapping
A paper-based illustration representing arc42 with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
arc42
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Purposedifferent
When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately.arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.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.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
MediumLowHighHigh
Timedifferent
2-4 h1-2 Tage2-6 hSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
4-101-43-10Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity BacklogArchitecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment ViewFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation ActionsPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations
Tagsno overlap
JourneyServiceService design
ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods