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 |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Product Discovery Test Card |  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. | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | The Test Card turns a critical assumption into a testable claim and specifies in advance which result counts as success. | 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 | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 45-90 min | 20-35 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 2-8 | 1-5 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Test Card with a pre-set threshold | 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 | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |