View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)Fake Door TestLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Experiment Canvas
| Criterion |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. | 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 experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 1-5 Tage | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | Nutzertraffic | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 1-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | 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 | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | 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 | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis |