View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Agile NoEstimates |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 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 | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | 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 | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | EstimationForecastingFlow |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
