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 a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration of many question cards around one challenge
Facilitation
Question Burst
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)
Purposedifferent
Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely.When a problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation.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
MediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h15-30 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
3-122-81 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsQuestion List, Reframed Challenge, Learning PromptsLean 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
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix