View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Mind MappingSAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Brainwriting
| Criterion |  Facilitation Mind Mapping |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Innovation Brainwriting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. | 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. | 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 loud voices or hierarchy distort the idea search, the method creates a quiet entry into joint development. It gives everyone thinking space and gathers contributions without social brakes, making diversity more visible and easier to build on. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 3-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives | 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 checks | Idea sheets, Expanded concepts, Prioritized list |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | BrainstormingCollaborationInclusionIdeas |