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)
Paper illustration of a Concept Map with concepts and labelled links
Knowledge Modeling
Concept Mapping
Paper illustration for Knowledge Mapping.
Knowledge Modeling
Knowledge Mapping
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
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.Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly.Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable.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
MediumMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-2 h1-3 hSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people1-83-12Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + 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 checksConcept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge GapsKnowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer PlanPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking
KnowledgeMappingRisk
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods