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)
Anonymous individual judgments pass through feedback loops to form a distribution.
Decision Making
Delphi Method
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 of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
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 knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together.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 a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.
Complexitydifferent
HighHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope1-4 Wochen3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting6-30 Experten1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + 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 alternativesExpert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption NotesLean 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 checksRisk Matrix, Top Risk List
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
Add more methods