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 notes move from an inbox to action, project and calendar collections.
Operations
Getting Things Done
Paper illustration for Weekly Review.
Operations
Weekly Review
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.With many open commitments and ideas in daily life, a reliable external storage system emerges. The method relieves the mind so priority and context don't have to compete in memory.In a week with many open loops, the method creates distance from operational noise. It organizes commitments, calendar, and projects so the next week becomes workable.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
MediumMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-2 h Setup, laufend30-60 minSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people11Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncAsyncWorkshop + 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 checksAction Lists, Project List, Review RoutineUpdated Task System, Weekly Focus, Next ActionsPrioritized 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
ProductivityPlanningTasksExecution
ProductivityExecutionPlanning
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods