View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Outcome-Driven InnovationARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Request for Comments
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | 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. | An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
