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 the Lotus Blossom working structure.
Innovation
Lotus Blossom
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of Design Charrette with its method-specific working model.
Innovation
Design Charrette
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 central question feels too large, the method breaks it into neighboring topic fields with their own depth of ideation. It holds structure and openness at the same time, so adjacent perspectives don't get lost. This grows an idea space out of a core problem.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.In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighMedium
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional45-90 minSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scopeHalber Tag bis mehrere Tage
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders10-50
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
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 checksLotus Diagram, Idea Themes, ShortlistPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsSketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
BrainstormingIdeationCreativityDivergenceWorkshop
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation
Add more methods