View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Accountability Ladder |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
