View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Crazy 8s |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With only a few minutes available and a still-fuzzy solution search, the method forces a wide range of variants. It produces fast sketches before the first idea can settle in, making different directions directly comparable and open to further development. | 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 two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 8-15 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Sketch Set, Idea Shortlist, Direction Options | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingSketchingSpeedDivergenceDesign sprint | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
