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 NoEstimates |  Architecture C4 Model |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 1-4 h | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 1-5 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | 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 |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
