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) |  Innovation Lean Startup |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For uncertain business assumptions, the method forces the idea into contact with real market reactions early. It separates wishful picture, assumption, and observable behavior, so that learning becomes faster than planning. This translates uncertainty into measurable insight. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Wochen bis Monate je Lernzyklus | 1-3 h | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 1-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Hypothesis list, MVPs, Learning reports, Pivot or persevere decision | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | LeanStartupValidationMVP | SensemakingDecisionRationale | RationaleKnowledgeDecision |