View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Radar |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Engineering Golden Path |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | 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 ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When teams need a reliable default path for frequent use, sprawl quickly emerges without any guiding logic. Golden Path bundles the preferred path so good practice becomes easy and deviation becomes deliberate. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 15-45 min | 1-3 Tage Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-3 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Golden Path Guide, Templates, Quality Checks |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | EngineeringProductivityGovernance |