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 for Soft Systems Methodology.
Systems Thinking
Soft Systems Methodology
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
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)
Purposedifferent
Soft Systems Methodology helps explore unclear or politically charged problems systematically. Instead of forcing a quick answer, the method builds a shared understanding of perspectives and room for action.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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
0.5-3 TageSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope15-45 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
5-15Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders1-31 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Rich Picture, Root Definitions, Conceptual Models, Change AgendaPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsADR File, Decision Log, RationaleLean 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
Tagsno overlap
Soft systemsComplexitySensemakingSystems thinking
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods