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 Specification by Example with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Agile
Specification by Example
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of Acceptance Criteria Workshop with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Agile
Acceptance Criteria Workshop
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 business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests.ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation.When a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope60-90 min pro FeatureSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope20-40 min pro Story
Participantsdifferent
Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting3-6Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders3-6
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 alternativesExample Table, Acceptance TestsPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsAcceptance Criteria, Story Update
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development
Add more methods