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 for Peer Instruction.
Knowledge Modeling
Peer Instruction
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
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.Peer Instruction uses group thinking to clarify difficult terms or concepts faster. The method combines individual reflection with social correction and shared precision.When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.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
MediumMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional10-20 min je Frage60–90 minPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people6-502-8Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting
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 checksConcept Questions, Vote Results, Learning NotesStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesDomain 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
LearningDialogueFacilitation
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
Add more methods