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 How Might We | ![]() Facilitation 1-2-4-All | ![]() Product Strategy Counter Metrics | ![]() Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction. | When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. | When a headline metric could mask side effects, it adds guardrail signals against unwanted outcomes. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as a counter-metric list and guardrail definitions. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 10-20 min | 30-60 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 4-100+ | 2-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Counter Metric List, Guardrail Definitions | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | MetricsMeasurementStrategyExperiments | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |



