View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Mad Sad Glad |  Architecture Risk Storming |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. | When a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 60-90 min | 45–75 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 4-12 | Team members involved | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | RetrospectiveTeamReflection | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |