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 |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Innovation Brainstorming |  UX Research Empathy 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 research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 45–90 min | 30-60 min | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 3-10 | 4-12 | 4-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |