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 StartupPretotypingLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Innovation Lean Startup |  Product Discovery Pretotyping |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Wochen bis Monate je Lernzyklus | Stunden bis wenige Tage | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 1-4 | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people |
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 | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision | Lean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checks |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | LeanStartupValidationMVP | ValidationDemandMVP | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean |