View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Planning PokerATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)Affinity EstimationLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
| Criterion |  Agile Planning Poker |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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. | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | 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 | Low | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 30-90 min | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 3-12 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | 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 | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean |