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
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)
Design sheets and interface cards connect to jointly written pseudocode with highlighted unresolved questions.
Architecture
ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)
Paper illustration of Five-Minute VC Check with its method-specific working model.
Business Strategy
5-Minuten VC-Check
Paper illustration of Lean Startup with its method-specific working model.
Innovation
Lean Startup
Purposedifferent
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.ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional5-15 minWochen bis Monate je Lernzyklus
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 peopleDesigners, developers as users, and facilitation1-52-8
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
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 checksPrioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisionsVC-check note, Go/sharpen/park decision, Risk and assumption list, Next validation stepHypothesis list, MVPs, Learning reports, Pivot or persevere decision
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks
StartupValidationCompetition
LeanStartupValidationMVP
Add more methods