View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Scatter Diagram |  Delivery RAID Log |  Operations 5 Whys |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When the question is whether two measures are related, the method makes patterns in the data picture visible. It separates felt correlations from relationships that actually show up in the data. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 15-30 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 1-4 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 2-6 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Scatter Plot, Korrelationsnotiz, Hypothesenliste | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | Root causeQualityVisualization | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |