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) |  Systems Thinking Current Reality Tree |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 2-6 h | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
