Skip to content

Scenario Weight Assignment and Prioritization

A scenario is a short story about how a system is used or changed. Teams can collect many of them, but cannot analyze all of them. Voting helps pick the ones that matter most.

Collecting scenarios. In step 7 of the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM), a larger set of scenarios is elicited from the entire stakeholder group. This is whole-group brainstorming. See the article “Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM)” for the full method.

Prioritizing by voting. ATAM then ranks the brainstormed set through a voting process. The entire stakeholder group takes part, not only a few people.

The same idea in another method. The Quality Attribute Workshop (QAW) works in a similar way. Stakeholders generate scenarios. Facilitators check that every architectural driver is addressed by at least one scenario. Stakeholders then prioritize the scenarios by voting.

The verified facts cover brainstorming and voting only. They do not describe how votes are scored or combined.

A team building an online shop runs a workshop. Stakeholders from sales, operations, and support suggest scenarios. One says “the payment provider goes down during a sale.” Another says “we add a new shipping partner.” After brainstorming, everyone votes. The highest-ranked scenarios are the ones the team looks at first.

Voting with the whole stakeholder group takes time and needs people to take part. In return, the ranking reflects the group’s shared view instead of one person’s opinion. The verified facts say no more about costs or limits.

From brainstorming to a ranked scenario list.

Diagram source
flowchart LR
A[Brainstorm scenarios with all stakeholders] --> B[Vote to prioritize]
B --> C[Ranked scenario list]
  • The scenario set was brainstormed with the entire stakeholder group.
  • The whole stakeholder group voted to prioritize the scenarios.
  • Each architectural driver is covered by at least one scenario.