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 TOWS Matrix.
Business Strategy
TOWS Matrix
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Paper illustration for Option Framing.
Decision Making
Option Framing
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.The TOWS Matrix connects internal strengths and weaknesses with external opportunities and threats into action-oriented strategies. It goes a step further than a pure stocktaking.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.In early decisions, alternatives are often still vague, incomplete, or blended together. Option Framing brings every possibility into a comparable form and makes visible which variant actually fits the question.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-2 hPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope45-120 min
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting3-8
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 checksTOWS Matrix, Strategic Options, Priority ActionsDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesOption Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision Inputs
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
StrategyAnalysisOptions
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison
Add more methods