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 |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  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 opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. | 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 | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-4 Wochen | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 5-12 Interviews | 3-10 Kunden | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | 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 | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |