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 Discovery Pretotyping |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Stunden bis wenige Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-4 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + 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 | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ValidationDemandMVP |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
