View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Business Strategy Three Horizons |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Three Horizons helps clarify strategic options across different timeframes. It compares strengths, risks, market logic, and investment choices, and captures the result as a horizon map, portfolio view, and initiatives per horizon. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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 | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | Halbtags-Workshop, dann iterativ | 60–90 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-8 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Horizon map, Portfolio view, Initiatives per horizon, Resource plan | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | 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 | StrategyInnovationPortfolioForesight | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
