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 Strategy Lean Canvas |  Product Discovery Pretotyping |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min | Stunden bis wenige Tage | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-6 | 1-4 | Nutzertraffic |
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 | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model | ValidationDemandMVP | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |