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)
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 two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
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.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.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional15-45 min2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people1-33-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop
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 alternativesLean 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 checksADR File, Decision Log, RationaleFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods