View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Agile ROAM Board |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 work needs to move between different states or columns, it makes that movement and its handoffs legible. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a ROAM Board and an Owner List. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 20-40 min initial, dann laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 3-15 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | ROAM Board, Owner List |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | RiskAgileTrackingAlignment |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
