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 Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | When the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Mehrere Wochen | 30-60 min je Interview |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
