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)Stakeholder Salience Model
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|
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 stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-6 |
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 | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
