View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Agile WSJF |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | When many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 5-15 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 3-20 | 3-10 | 5-30 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | 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 | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay Assumptions | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |