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) |  Team Design Team API |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Half day initial, dann laufend | 1-4 Wochen | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 3-10 Kunden | 1-4 |
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 | Team API Document | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |