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 Hypothesis Prioritization Canvas with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
Hypothesis Prioritization Canvas
Paper illustration of a branching tree with an outcome at its root, customer opportunities, solution options and small experiment cards.
Product Discovery
Opportunity Solution Tree
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.When many hypotheses compete for attention, it brings order to their learning sequence and importance. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a prioritization canvas and a hypothesis backlog.When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure.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
MediumMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional60-90 min1-2 h Setup, laufendSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-82-6Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
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 checksPrioritization Canvas, Hypothesis BacklogOpportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning LogPrioritized 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
ExperimentsPrioritizationDiscoveryHypothesis
DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods