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 Problem Interview |  Architecture arc42 |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-2 Tage | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 5-12 Interviews | 1-4 | 3-10 Kunden |
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 | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery |