View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)RolestormingLotus Blossom
| Criterion |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Innovation Rolestorming |  Innovation Lotus Blossom |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | When a search for ideas stalls, switching roles helps people step outside their own perspective and activate new logics of action. The method reduces habit because contributions arise from a different stance. This brings unfamiliar, often fitting solution approaches into play. | When a central question feels too large, the method breaks it into neighboring topic fields with their own depth of ideation. It holds structure and openness at the same time, so adjacent perspectives don't get lost. This grows an idea space out of a core problem. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 3-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
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 checks | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Rollenkarten, Ideenpool pro Rolle, Konsolidierte Shortlist | Lotus Diagram, Idea Themes, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | BrainstormingIdeationCreativity | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityDivergenceWorkshop |