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 Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Voting |
|---|---|---|---|
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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 60–90 min | 5-15 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
