View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:ROAM Board8D Problem SolvingSAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
| Criterion |  Agile ROAM Board |  Operations 8D Problem Solving |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work needs to move between different states or columns, it makes that movement and its handoffs legible. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a ROAM Board and an Owner List. | For an acute quality or delivery problem, the method structures immediate protection and root cause work together. It keeps the situation stable while the actual cause is investigated cleanly. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 20-40 min initial, dann laufend | 1-6 Wochen | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional |
Participantsdifferent | 3-15 | 4-10 | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | ROAM Board, Owner List | 8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action Plan | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives | 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 |
Tagsno overlap | RiskAgileTrackingAlignment | QualityProblem solvingRoot cause | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean |