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) |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Decision Making Trade-off Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 45-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
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 | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Trade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted Downsides |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions |