View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Risk Storming |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. | LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog | Lean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checks | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
