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 Strategy Execution Loop with its method-specific working model.
Business Strategy
Strategy Execution Loop
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of a team retrospective with three separate Start, Stop, and Continue areas and a shared action list.
Agile
Start Stop Continue
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
The Strategy Execution Loop helps avoid treating strategy as a one-off document. It makes visible how strategic decisions are turned into objectives, initiatives, operational work, measurement, and learning.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 a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood.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
Initial 3-6 h, then monthly or quarterly reviewsSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope30-60 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
5-12Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders3-121 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Execution Loop, Review Cadence, Strategic Learning LogPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsStart Stop Continue Board, Improvement ActionsLean 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
ExecutionCadenceLearningGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods