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 with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Paper illustration for Risk Storming.
Architecture
Risk Storming
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.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope1-3 h3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting5-301 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people4-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
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 alternativesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasLean 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 checksAnnotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation
Add more methods