ISAA: An Iterative Framework for Software Architecture Assessment

Software architecture plays a decisive role for success of software projects, influencing critical aspects such as scalability, performance, reliability, and maintainability. Systematic assessment of software architectures allows development teams to identify risks early, validate quality attributes, and ensure alignment with business objectives throughout the software development lifecycle. Over the years, different approaches have emerged to guide this process, notably the Architectural Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM) and the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 standard. While ATAM offers a structured methodology for identifying and balancing tradeoffs between architectural decisions, the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 standard introduces a comprehensive governance model that encompasses the management, assessment, and conceptualization of architectures in various contexts. This dissertation presents a comparative analysis between ATAM and ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019, highlighting their evolution, complementarities, and the new architectural concerns that have emerged over the past two decades. The comparison reveals that ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 expands traditional assessment practices by incorporating processes for continuous architectural governance and lifecycle integration, reflecting contemporary demands in Software Engineering. The broader scope of the standard does not diminish the relevance of specialized methods like ATAM; rather, it points to a complementary relationship in which targeted assessment techniques can be incorporated into more comprehensive frameworks for greater applicability in industry and academia. Based on the comparative study of ATAM and ISO/IEC/IEEE:42020:2019, the Iterative Software Architecture Assessment (ISAA) framework is proposed as an iterative and hybrid methodology, based on clause 9 of the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 standard. ISAA aims to operationalize architectural assessments by providing structured and repeatable procedures that facilitate documentation and communication among stakeholders, including architects, developers, product owners, and managers, across all development phases. The framework's design is grounded in a literature review, an analysis of established methods, and empirical validation with software industry professionals. The results suggest that ISAA's effectiveness depends heavily on organizational maturity, contextual adaptability, and achieving an appropriate balance between methodological rigor and agility.

Software architecture plays a decisive role for success of software projects, influencing critical aspects such as scalability, performance, reliability, and maintainability. Systematic assessment of software architectures allows development teams to identify risks early, validate quality attributes, and ensure alignment with business objectives throughout the software development lifecycle. Over the years, different approaches have emerged to guide this process, notably the Architectural Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM) and the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 standard. While ATAM offers a structured methodology for identifying and balancing tradeoffs between architectural decisions, the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 standard introduces a comprehensive governance model that encompasses the management, assessment, and conceptualization of architectures in various contexts. This dissertation presents a comparative analysis between ATAM and ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019, highlighting their evolution, complementarities, and the new architectural concerns that have emerged over the past two decades. The comparison reveals that ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 expands traditional assessment practices by incorporating processes for continuous architectural governance and lifecycle integration, reflecting contemporary demands in Software Engineering. The broader scope of the standard does not diminish the relevance of specialized methods like ATAM; rather, it points to a complementary relationship in which targeted assessment techniques can be incorporated into more comprehensive frameworks for greater applicability in industry and academia. Based on the comparative study of ATAM and ISO/IEC/IEEE:42020:2019, the Iterative Software Architecture Assessment (ISAA) framework is proposed as an iterative and hybrid methodology, based on clause 9 of the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019 standard. ISAA aims to operationalize architectural assessments by providing structured and repeatable procedures that facilitate documentation and communication among stakeholders, including architects, developers, product owners, and managers, across all development phases. The framework's design is grounded in a literature review, an analysis of established methods, and empirical validation with software industry professionals. The results suggest that ISAA's effectiveness depends heavily on organizational maturity, contextual adaptability, and achieving an appropriate balance between methodological rigor and agility.

A arquitetura de software pode determinar o sucesso ou o fracasso de um projeto, mas avaliá-la de forma sistemática ainda é um desafio para muitas equipes. O trabalho compara dois referenciais dessa área: o método ATAM, voltado à análise de decisões e tradeoffs arquiteturais, e a norma ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019, que trata da governança da arquitetura ao longo de todo o ciclo de vida. A comparação mostra que a norma amplia as práticas tradicionais ao incorporar processos contínuos de governança, sem substituir métodos especializados como o ATAM, e sim complementando-os. Com base nesse estudo, propõe-se o framework ISAA, uma abordagem iterativa e híbrida que busca tornar as avaliações arquiteturais mais estruturadas, repetíveis e aplicáveis em diferentes fases do desenvolvimento.