View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Specification by ExampleARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Test CardFake Door Test
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Discovery Test Card |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | The Test Card turns a critical assumption into a testable claim and specifies in advance which result counts as success. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 20-35 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-5 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Test Card with a pre-set threshold | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |