View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Card SortingLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
| Criterion |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail. | 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. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Lean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checks | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationStructure | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |