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)Future Reality TreeAssumption SurfacingSAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
| Criterion |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture 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. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 2-4 h | 45-90 min | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 3-8 | 2-8 | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + 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 checks | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality |