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
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration of Stakeholder Salience Model with its method-specific working model.
Facilitation
Stakeholder Salience Model
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumHigh
Timedifferent
1-2 h60–90 min60-90 minSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
3-122-83-6Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesSalience Diagram, Strategy per ClassPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods