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 How Might We |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Discovery Pretotyping |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction. | 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. | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Stunden bis wenige Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-4 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ValidationDemandMVP |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
