View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Opportunity InterviewARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Opportunity Solution Tree
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | 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 discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
