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 for Risk Storming.
Architecture
Risk Storming
Paper illustration with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
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.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.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.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
LowHighHighHigh
Timedifferent
60-90 minPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope1-4 WochenSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
4-12Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting1-6Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action BacklogDomain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternativesExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations
Tagsno overlap
RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods