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 |  Innovation Rolestorming |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 10-20 min | 30-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 4-100+ | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Rollenkarten, Ideenpool pro Rolle, Konsolidierte Shortlist | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tags1 shared | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | BrainstormingIdeationCreativity | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |