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)Card SortingFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 20-45 min | 2-6 h | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | Based on research question | 3-10 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | 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 |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | Information architectureNavigationStructure | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean |