Compare

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 Record Golden Path Fake Door Test ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)

Criterion	Architecture Architecture Decision Record	Engineering Golden Path	Product Discovery Fake Door Test	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)
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.	When teams need a reliable default path for frequent use, sprawl quickly emerges without any guiding logic. Golden Path bundles the preferred path so good practice becomes easy and deviation becomes deliberate.	When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Medium	Medium	Medium
Timedifferent	15-45 min	1-3 Tage Setup, laufend	1-5 Tage	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional
Participantsdifferent	1-3	2-8	Nutzertraffic	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation
Formatdifferent	Async	Workshop + async	Async	Workshop + async
Outputdifferent	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale	Golden Path Guide, Templates, Quality Checks	Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance	EngineeringProductivityGovernance	ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks

Add more methods