View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Team APILASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)ROAM BoardATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
| Criterion |  Team Design Team API |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Agile ROAM Board |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | 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. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | Half day initial, dann laufend | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 20-40 min initial, dann laufend | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 3-15 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Team API Document | Lean 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 | ROAM Board, Owner List | 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 | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | RiskAgileTrackingAlignment | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |