View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery RAID Log |  Operations ABC Analysis |  Operations RACI Matrix |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention. | With unclear responsibilities across several roles or areas, the method creates unambiguous accountability logic. It reduces friction because decision, execution, contribution, and information become separately visible. | 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 | Low | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 1-5 | 2-8 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RAID Log, Status Report Source | ABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List | RACI Matrix, Responsibility Map, Decision Notes | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio | RolesResponsibilityGovernanceOperations | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |