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 |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Discovery Dual-Track Agile |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | When uncertainty and delivery run in parallel, it separates learning work from implementation while keeping both connected. It prevents unvalidated ideas from falling directly into the delivery stream. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 30-60 min je Interview | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Laufend, Wochen bis Monate |
Participantsdifferent | 2-4 pro Pitch | 5-12 Interviews | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 4-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Discovery Backlog, Delivery Backlog, Experiment-Ergebnisse, Validierte Stories |
Tagsno overlap | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | AgileDiscoveryDelivery |