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 Smoke Test |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-5 Tage | 45-90 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | Nutzertraffic | 3-12 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ChangeDecisionStrategy | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |