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)Starfish RetrospectiveStart Stop Continue
| Criterion |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |  Agile Start Stop Continue |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 improvement options need to be sorted more finely than just start and stop, it brings observations into clear kinds of action. This makes visible what should be done more, less, newly, or continued. | When a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood. |
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 | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 4-12 | 3-12 |
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 | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Start Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection |