View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Brainstorming |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Innovation Rolestorming |  Innovation Reverse Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | When a search for ideas stalls, switching roles helps people step outside their own perspective and activate new logics of action. The method reduces habit because contributions arise from a different stance. This brings unfamiliar, often fitting solution approaches into play. | For persistent errors or blockages, the method shifts the view to the opposite of the desired effect. It exposes the mechanics of failure and makes hidden causes easier to grasp. This makes improvement more concrete and the problem clearer. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 30–60 min | 30-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 4-8 | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Rollenkarten, Ideenpool pro Rolle, Konsolidierte Shortlist | Reverse Ideas, Risk Themes, Solution Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingIdeationCreativity | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityRisk |