methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
How Might We
Innovation
How Might We
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of many question cards around one challenge
Facilitation
Question Burst
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 a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.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 problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation.
Complexitysame
LowLowLowLow
Timedifferent
30–45 min5-15 min10-20 min15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
1-103-204-100+2-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent ThemesQuestion List, Reframed Challenge, Learning Prompts
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
Add more methods