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) |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Product Strategy OKRs |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | When strategic direction needs to become measurable, it connects ambition with checkable results. It makes goals connectable to focus and review. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 30-60 min | 1-2 h Setup | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 2-20 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | OKR set, Measurement plan, Review cadence | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | GoalsAlignmentOutcomesMeasurement | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |