methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Criterion
Paper illustration of Lean Startup with its method-specific working model.
Innovation
Lean Startup
Paper illustration of Pretotyping with its method-specific working model.
Product Discovery
Pretotyping
Design sheets and interface cards connect to jointly written pseudocode with highlighted unresolved questions.
Architecture
ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Purposedifferent
For uncertain business assumptions, the method forces the idea into contact with real market reactions early. It separates wishful picture, assumption, and observable behavior, so that learning becomes faster than planning. This translates uncertainty into measurable insight.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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
Wochen bis Monate je LernzyklusStunden bis wenige Tage2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional
Participantsdifferent
2-81-4Designers, developers as users, and facilitation1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Hypothesis list, MVPs, Learning reports, Pivot or persevere decisionPretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decisionPrioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisionsLean 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
Tagsno overlap
LeanStartupValidationMVP
ValidationDemandMVP
ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Add more methods