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 Strategy DIBB |  Decision Making Decision Tree |  Decision Making Delphi Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch. | When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-2 h | 30-90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 1-6 | 6-30 Experten |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | DecisionTreeOptions | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy |