Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:HEART Framework Architecture Decision Record ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)arc42

Criterion	UX Research HEART Framework	Architecture Architecture Decision Record	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Architecture arc42
Purposedifferent	Helps clarify observations, needs, and patterns in concrete terms. It groups observations into patterns, questions, and decisions. The result is captured as a HEART-GSM table and dashboard.	An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.	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.	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	120 min initial, dann laufend	15-45 min	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	1-2 Tage
Participantsdifferent	3-6	1-3	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	1-4
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Async	Workshop + async	Workshop + async
Outputdifferent	HEART-GSM Table, Dashboard	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View
Tagsno overlap	MetricsUX researchMeasurementSatisfaction	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication

Add more methods