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 the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Paper illustration for 3-Circle Venn Diagram
Facilitation
3-Circle Venn Diagram
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.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning.When three perspectives matter at the same time, a Three-Circle Venn Diagram shows the overlaps and remainders precisely. It makes visible where shared effect arises and where only a partial perspective applies.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-3 hPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people5-30Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting2-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + 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 checksConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesVenn Diagram, Overlap Notes, Differentiators
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
ComparisonFacilitationAlignment
Add more methods