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)
A paper-based illustration representing WSJF with its core stages and visible working result.
Agile
WSJF
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
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.When many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together.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.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
MediumHighHighLow
Timedifferent
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional45-90 minPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting3-10
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 checksRanked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesRisk Matrix, Top Risk List
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
Add more methods