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)Example MappingThree AmigosATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Agile Example Mapping |  Agile Three Amigos |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis 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. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | When story, test, and implementation could drift apart, it brings business perspective, engineering, and quality together early. It prevents a story from being read differently only late in the process. | ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 30-60 min | 15-30 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-7 | 3 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |