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 Start Stop Continue |  Delivery RAID Log |  Agile Mad Sad Glad |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood. | 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. | When a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible. | 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 | 30-60 min | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 30-60 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-10 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Start Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items | 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 | RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | RetrospectiveTeamReflection | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |