Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method
The SEI Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM) is the leading method in the area of software architecture evaluation. An evaluation using the ATAM typically takes three to four days and gathers together a trained evaluation team, architects, and representatives of the architecture's various stakeholders. Proven benefits of the ATAM include
- clarified quality attribute requirements
- improved architecture documentation
- documented basis for architectural decisions
- identified risks early in the life cycle
- increased communication among stakeholders
A Conceptual Flow of the ATAM
Business drivers and the software architecture are elicited from project decision makers. These are refined into scenarios and the architectural decisions made in support of each one. Analysis of scenarios and decisions results in identification of risks, non-risks, sensitivity points, and tradeoff points in the architecture. Risks are synthesized into a set of risk themes, showing how each one threatens a business driver.
The most important results are improved architectures. The output of an ATAM is an out-brief presentation and/or a written report that includes the major findings of the evaluation. These are typically:
- the architectural styles identified
- a "utility tree" — a hierarchic model of the driving architectural requirements
- the set of scenarios generated and the subset that were mapped onto the architecture
- a set of quality-attribute-specific questions that were applied to the architecture and the responses to these questions
- a set of identified risks
- a set of identified non-risks
Additional Information
For consulting information about ATAM, visit our consulting pages. Direct technical questions about ATAM to us using the link in the For more information box at the bottom of this page.
You can also become certified to lead your own ATAM evaluations. For more information on becoming an SEI-Certified ATAM Leader, visit our certification page.
Software Architecture Training and Publications
Further Reading
Categorizing Business Goals for Software Architectures
Rick Kazman & Len Bass
Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies
Paul Clements, Rick Kazman, & Mark Klein
Integrating Software-Architecture-Centric Methods into Extreme Programming (XP) Robert L. Nord, James E. Tomayko, & Rob Wojcik
Risk Themes Discovered Through Architecture Evaluations
Len Bass, Robert Nord, William Wood, & David Zubrow
