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)After-Action ReviewLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)A3 Problem Solving
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Operations After-Action Review |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. | LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail. | For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 20-45 min | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-12 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 2-5 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | Lean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checks | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | LearningOperationsImprovement | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |