View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Solution InterviewArchitecture Decision RecordARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Solution Interview |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 15-45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional |
Participantsdifferent | 5-10 Interviews | 1-3 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation Notes | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationInterviewsPrototype | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
