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 |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 10-20 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 4-100+ |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | FacilitationInclusionIdeation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
