View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Three AmigosLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)Example Mapping
| Criterion |  Agile Three Amigos |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When story, test, and implementation could drift apart, it brings business perspective, engineering, and quality together early. It prevents a story from being read differently only late in the process. | 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. | SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-30 min | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | 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 | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |