Compare

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)Lean Canvas Argument Mapping Architecture Decision Record

Criterion	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Product Strategy Lean Canvas	Decision Making Argument 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 an early product bet still has too many open points, it brings target group, problem, and assumptions into a single view. It condenses the idea so core risks become nameable.	When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.	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	45-90 min	1-3 h	15-45 min
Participantsdifferent	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	1-6	1-8	1-3
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop + async	Workshop + async	Async
Outputdifferent	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	Lean Canvas, Core Assumptions, Experiment Backlog	Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model	SensemakingDecisionRationale	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance

Add more methods