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)Crazy 8sATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)Brainstorming
| Criterion |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Innovation Crazy 8s |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | With only a few minutes available and a still-fuzzy solution search, the method forces a wide range of variants. It produces fast sketches before the first idea can settle in, making different directions directly comparable and open to further development. | 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 team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 8-15 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 1-10 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | 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 | Sketch Set, Idea Shortlist, Direction Options | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | BrainstormingSketchingSpeedDivergenceDesign sprint | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |