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 radar with five axes, two current and target profiles, and evidence cards beside each dimension.
Decision Making
Radar
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Design sheets and interface cards connect to jointly written pseudocode with highlighted unresolved questions.
Architecture
ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)
Paper illustration for Risk Storming.
Architecture
Risk Storming
Purposedifferent
When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do.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.ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification.Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 hSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-10Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholdersDesigners, developers as users, and facilitation4-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action AreasPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsPrioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisionsAnnotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog
Tagsno overlap
AssessmentPortfolioCapability
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks
RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation
Add more methods