View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery Shape Up |  Innovation Lean Startup |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | For uncertain business assumptions, the method forces the idea into contact with real market reactions early. It separates wishful picture, assumption, and observable behavior, so that learning becomes faster than planning. This translates uncertainty into measurable insight. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | Wochen bis Monate je Lernzyklus | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional |
Participantsdifferent | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-8 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Hypothesis list, MVPs, Learning reports, Pivot or persevere decision | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions |
Tagsno overlap | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | LeanStartupValidationMVP | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
