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
A paper-based illustration representing Product Canvas with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Strategy
Product Canvas
A paper-based illustration representing C4 Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
C4 Model
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
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
When product goal and feature scope don't yet fit cleanly together, it creates a shared working picture. It connects need, core features, and assumptions into a solid starting point.The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes.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.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
MediumLowHighMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-4 hSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
2-81-5Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Product Canvas, Product Assumptions, Scope NotesContext Diagram, Container Diagram, Component DiagramPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsLean 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
CanvasDiscoveryScope
ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods