View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Agile NoEstimates |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. | 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 estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 2-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication | 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 | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules |
Tagsno overlap | ForecastingFlowDelivery | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | EstimationForecastingFlow |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
