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 a team retrospective with three separate Start, Stop, and Continue areas and a shared action list.
Agile
Start Stop Continue
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration for Starfish Retrospective
Agile
Starfish Retrospective
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 team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood.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.When improvement options need to be sorted more finely than just start and stop, it brings observations into clear kinds of action. This makes visible what should be done more, less, newly, or continued.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighLow
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional30-60 minSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-12Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders4-12
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 checksStart Stop Continue Board, Improvement ActionsPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsStarfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam
Add more methods