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 of two user profile cards with a goal, behavior evidence, and an open research question.
UX Research
Personas
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Purposedifferent
When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.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.For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 Tage15-45 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
Internes Team1-31 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario NotesADR File, Decision Log, RationaleLean 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 checksFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
ResearchCustomerSynthesis
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods