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 illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of RAID Log with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Delivery
RAID Log
Purposedifferent
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.SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighHighLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur EntscheidungPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scopeSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope30 min Setup, dann laufend
Participantsdifferent
3-20 ReviewerArchitecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weightingEvaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsRAID Log, Status Report Source
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance
Add more methods