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 of the Morphological Analysis working structure.
Innovation
Morphological Analysis
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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.For a search for solutions with many degrees of freedom, a grid emerges for systematic combinations. The method separates features, variants, and exclusion criteria, so the space gets explored deliberately.When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30–45 min5-15 min1-3 h60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
1-103-202-85-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistMorphological Box, Concept Combinations, Idea ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
IdeationInnovationCreativity
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods