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 Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
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 demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-5 Tage | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tags1 shared | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
