View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Mind Mapping |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Strategy Lean Canvas |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. | 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 an early product bet still has too many open points, it brings target group, problem, and assumptions into a single view. It condenses the idea so core risks become nameable. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-6 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Lean Canvas, Core Assumptions, Experiment Backlog | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |