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 SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Operations 5 Whys |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 15-30 min | 30-240 min |
Participantsdifferent | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | 2-6 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | 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 | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
