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 Change Analysis |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  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. | For a deviation after a change, the method isolates the influence of the altered condition. It narrows down which differences are relevant and which are just accompanying noise. | For a critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | 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 | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 45-120 min | 2-6 h | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 2-6 | 3-8 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Change Matrix, Cause Hypotheses, Validation Questions, Action List | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | 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 | ChangeRoot causeTroubleshootingComparison | RiskRoot causeSafety | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |