View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Solution Interview |  Innovation Design Thinking |  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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | 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 | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional |
Participantsdifferent | 5-10 Interviews | 4-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation Notes | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationInterviewsPrototype | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
