methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Option Framing.
Decision Making
Option Framing
A paper-based illustration representing arc42 with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
arc42
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Purposedifferent
In early decisions, alternatives are often still vague, incomplete, or blended together. Option Framing brings every possibility into a comparable form and makes visible which variant actually fits the question.arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.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.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
MediumLowHighHigh
Timedifferent
45-120 min1-2 TagePreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scopeSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
3-81-4Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weightingEvaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Option Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision InputsArchitecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment ViewDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations
Tagsno overlap
OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison
ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods