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)Stakeholder Salience ModelArchitecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|
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 stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 60-90 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 3-6 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | 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 checks | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
