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 the Value Proposition Canvas: Value Map with products and services, pain relievers and gain creators on the left; Customer Profile with jobs, pains and gains on the right.
Product Strategy
Value Proposition Canvas
Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
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)
Paper illustration of a Business Model Canvas with nine connected compartments, a few notes and symbols for customers, delivery and economic relationships.
Business Strategy
Business Model Canvas
Purposedifferent
When the value proposition and customer expectation drift apart, it makes fit and mismatch legible. It shows where offering and need don't yet come together.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.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.The Business Model Canvas condenses a business model to its key building blocks and assumptions. It makes variants quickly comparable and reveals gaps before validation or implementation begins.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 hSeveral meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
2-8Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people2-8
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Value Proposition Canvas, Fit Gaps, HypothesesPrioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigationsLean 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 checksBusiness Model Canvas, Assumption List, Business Hypotheses
Tagsno overlap
ValueNeedsStrategy
ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Business modelStrategyValueInnovation
Add more methods