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 InnovationRequest for CommentsLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Architecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 3-20 Reviewer | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Lean 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 | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |