View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Architecture Decision RecordARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Alignment Mapping
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | 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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
