Makes capabilities or options comparable across dimensions and scores and derives focused action areas.
Core question: Where do we stand on each dimension with evidence, what profile do we need and what change will we test next?
Decision methodMethod form: Decision method. Describes how this method is used in practice.MediumComplexity: medium. Estimates preparation, facilitation effort, and method confidence needed.Workshop + asyncFormat: workshop or async. Shows whether the method works in a workshop, asynchronously, or both.
1-2 h
2-10
Details
Decision MakingCategory: Decision Making. Describes the method's domain of use.
Moves options, criteria, and risks toward a concrete result through "set the scales for likelihood and impact", "collect risks or carry them over from earlier identification", and "define actions for each high-risk item".
Core question: Which risks exceed our tolerance in the agreed horizon, and which response reduces them credibly?
Decision methodMethod form: Decision method. Describes how this method is used in practice.LowComplexity: low. Estimates preparation, facilitation effort, and method confidence needed.Workshop + asyncFormat: workshop or async. Shows whether the method works in a workshop, asynchronously, or both.
30-60 min
3-10
Details
ArchitectureCategory: Architecture. Describes the method's domain of use.
Helps a small team assess the main quality risks in its software and choose where to investigate further.
Core question: How well does our software meet its quality goals, and which risks should we investigate further?
Analysis methodMethod form: Analysis method. Describes how this method is used in practice.MediumComplexity: medium. Estimates preparation, facilitation effort, and method confidence needed.Workshop + asyncFormat: workshop or async. Shows whether the method works in a workshop, asynchronously, or both.
3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people