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)IBISKnowledge MappingArchitecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge 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. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 3-12 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | KnowledgeMappingRisk | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |