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 Product Vision Board with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
Product Vision Board
Paper illustration of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
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 a product needs a shared direction, it connects target audience, benefit, and business picture in a clear vision. It makes the envisioned future legible for the team.When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.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
MediumLowLowHigh
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-2 h30-60 minSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people2-82-8Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + 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 checksProduct Vision Board, Vision Statement, Assumptions and Validation QuestionsPower Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderPrioritized 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
VisionCanvasStrategyAlignment
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods