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) |  Product Strategy Impact Mapping |  Business Strategy Ansoff Matrix |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures. | The Ansoff Matrix organizes growth options by market and product relation. It helps weigh expansion, diversification, and adaptation cleanly against each other. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | 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 | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options | Ansoff Matrix, Growth Options, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning | GrowthStrategyMarketPortfolio |