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 a branching category tree with a highlighted search path and possible dead ends.
UX Research
Tree Testing
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of RAID Log with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Delivery
RAID Log
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
When a navigation exists but search paths still fail, tree testing checks findability without visual distraction. The method shows whether labels, levels, and paths really lead to the intended destination.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.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.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
MediumHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 TageSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope30 min Setup, dann laufend3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
Based on research questionEvaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsRAID Log, Status Report SourceLean 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
Information architectureNavigationFindability
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods