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 Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Innovation Starbursting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. | Helps clarify ideas, open questions, and testable next steps in concrete terms. It opens the thinking space, collects ideas, and leads to testable options. The result is captured as a star-shaped question map, question list, and assumption list. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 4-8 | 3-10 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery |