View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | 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 assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
