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)Expectation MappingArchitecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|
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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-12 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
