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.

Selected:LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Request for CommentsAssumption MappingRisk Matrix
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 Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration of a calm four-quadrant Assumption Map with hypothesis cards and emphasis on important assumptions with little evidence.
Product Discovery
Assumption Mapping
Paper illustration of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
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.An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale.When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first.When a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung45-60 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-20 Reviewer2-83-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + 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 checksRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsAssumption map, Test backlog, Risk rankingRisk Matrix, Top Risk List
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
Add more methods