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 Double Diamond |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Innovation Design Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For complex problems with a fuzzy situation, the method cleanly separates search space and decision. It first creates breadth in understanding and then focus in elaboration. This brings open questions, problem definition, and solution path into a traceable movement. | 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 complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | InnovationPrototypeResearch |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
