View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:World CaféATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Alignment Mapping
| Criterion |  Facilitation World Café |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a group needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity. | 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. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-180 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 12-100+ | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | 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 | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |