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
A paper-based illustration representing Wardley Mapping with its core stages and visible working result.
Systems Thinking
Wardley Mapping
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 with architecture components and concrete change tasks for comparison.
Architecture
SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)
Purposedifferent
Wardley Mapping makes visible where an offering stands today and where it can evolve. The method connects user need, value chain, and evolution stages into a strategic basis for platform, build, or buy decisions.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 h3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additionalPreparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope
Participantsdifferent
2-101 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 peopleArchitecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Wardley Map, Strategic Options, Evolution NotesLean 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 checksDomain 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
Tagsno overlap
StrategySystems thinkingDynamics
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration: scenarios and architectural decisions are connected to identified risks.
Architecture
ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
Paper illustration of Leverage Points with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Leverage Points
Paper illustration of System Dynamics Simulation with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
System Dynamics Simulation
Paper illustration for Behavior Over Time Graph.
Systems Thinking
Behavior Over Time Graph