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
Quality Attribute Workshop workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Architecture
Quality Attribute Workshop
A paper-based illustration representing arc42 with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
arc42
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent
A Quality Attribute Workshop translates quality requirements into concrete scenarios and architecture impulses. The method brings product, engineering, and operations to the same view of desired properties.arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighLow
Timedifferent
2-4 h1-2 Tage1-4 Wochen15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
5-151-41-61-3
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Quality Scenarios, Priority List, Architecture ConcernsArchitecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment ViewExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap
RequirementsArchitectureWorkshop
ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Add more methods