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)DIBBLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Assumption Surfacing
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-2 h | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 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 | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | 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 | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |