Compare

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)Risk Storming A3 Problem Solving Assumption Mapping

Criterion	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Architecture Risk Storming	Operations A3 Problem Solving	Product Discovery Assumption 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.	Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog.	For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together.	When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium
Timedifferent	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	60-90 min	45-90 min	45-60 min
Participantsdifferent	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	4-12	2-5	2-8
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop + async	Workshop + async
Outputdifferent	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog	A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis	Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation	LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations	AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation

Add more methods