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:arc42 ALPEN Method ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Architecture Decision Record

Criterion	Architecture arc42	Operations ALPEN Method	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Architecture Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent	arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.	With an overloaded day full of too many tasks, a realistic picture of the day emerges. The method connects estimating, deciding, and buffer thinking so planning fits available energy and time.	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.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Low	Medium	Low
Timedifferent	1-2 Tage	10-20 min daily	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	15-45 min
Participantsdifferent	1-4	1	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	1-3
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Async	Workshop + async	Async
Outputdifferent	Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View	Daily Plan, Time Estimates, Review Notes	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication	PlanningTime managementProductivityOperations	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance

Add more methods