View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Outcome-Driven InnovationRAID LogATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)Design Thinking
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Delivery RAID Log |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Innovation Design Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | High | High |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | InnovationPrototypeResearch |