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:ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Architecture Decision Record Fake Door Test MVP Test Matrix

Criterion	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Architecture Architecture Decision Record	Product Discovery Fake Door Test	Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix
Purposedifferent	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.	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.	When several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium
Timedifferent	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	15-45 min	1-5 Tage	45-75 min
Participantsdifferent	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	1-3	Nutzertraffic	2-8
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Async	Async	Workshop
Outputdifferent	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale	Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision	Test Matrix, Test Plan
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance	ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery	ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions

Add more methods