Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Selected:Problem Interview Architecture Inception Canvas Architecture Decision Record ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)

Criterion	Product Discovery Problem Interview	Architecture Architecture Inception Canvas	Architecture Architecture Decision Record	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)
Purposedifferent	When the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.	The Architecture Inception Canvas bundles the first architecture questions into a compact decision picture. It fits when an initiative is still in motion but still needs clear guardrails.	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.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Low	Low	Medium
Timedifferent	30-60 min je Interview	1-2 h	15-45 min	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional
Participantsdifferent	5-12 Interviews	3-8	1-3	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop	Async	Workshop + async
Outputdifferent	Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments	Inception Canvas, Risks, Goal List, Open Questions	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions
Tagsno overlap	DiscoveryInterviewsValidation	AlignmentArchitectureCanvas	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks

Add more methods