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.

Selected:Polarity MappingRequest for CommentsLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Risk Matrix
Criterion
Paper illustration of a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
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 of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
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.An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale.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 a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-20 Reviewer1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsLean 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 checksRisk Matrix, Top Risk List
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
Add more methods