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)Failure Mode and Effects AnalysisLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)5 Whys
| Criterion |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 2-6 h | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | 3-10 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
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 | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | 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 | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |