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 for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
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 Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
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.In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels.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.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.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h45-90 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung
Participantsdifferent
2-103-121 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-20 Reviewer
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action AreasRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogLean 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 checksRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets
Tagsno overlap
AssessmentPortfolioCapability
DecisionRolesGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
Add more methods