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 |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Decision Making Argument 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. | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 1-8 | 2-8 | 1-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | SensemakingDecisionRationale |