View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Wizard of Oz Test |
|---|---|---|---|
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 an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. | When a new experience would still be too expensive to automate for real, it simulates the outcome behind the scenes. It checks user reaction and value before the technology disappears. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-4 Wochen | 2-10 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-10 Kunden | 5-20 Nutzer |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Prototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List |
Tags1 shared | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | PrototypeValidationMVP |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
