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:RAID Log Problem Interview ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Architecture Decision Record

Criterion	Delivery RAID Log	Product Discovery Problem Interview	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Architecture Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent	Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting.	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.	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.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Medium	Medium	Low
Timedifferent	30 min Setup, dann laufend	30-60 min je Interview	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	15-45 min
Participantsdifferent	1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone	5-12 Interviews	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	1-3
Formatdifferent	Async	Workshop + async	Workshop + async	Async
Outputdifferent	RAID Log, Status Report Source	Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap	RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance	DiscoveryInterviewsValidation	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance

Add more methods