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 of Shape Up with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Shape Up
Paper illustration for OODA Loop.
Decision Making
OODA Loop
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Purposedifferent
Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts.In dynamic situations, decisions become outdated faster than they can be prepared. The OODA Loop holds observing, orienting, deciding, and acting together as a recurring rhythm so reaction does not slide into inertia.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
MediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down15-60 min je ZyklusSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
2-4 pro Pitch1-8Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomesSituation Assessment, Decision Loop, Action UpdatesPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations
Tagsno overlap
PlanningDeliveryAutonomy
DecisionChangeLearningStrategy
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration for Communication Plan
Delivery
Communication Plan
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
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)
A hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Decision Making
Pre-Mortem