View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Strategy Lean Canvas |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an early product bet still has too many open points, it brings target group, problem, and assumptions into a single view. It condenses the idea so core risks become nameable. | 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. | 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. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 15-45 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 1-3 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Lean Canvas, Core Assumptions, Experiment Backlog | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |