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 Standard Work Analysis.
Operations
Standard Work Analysis
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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
When the same task is done differently depending on the person, the method exposes the reliable core. It creates comparability without unnecessarily choking off needed latitude.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h5-15 min60-120 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
2-63-205-121 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training NeedsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityLean 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
LeanProcessQuality
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods