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 |  Innovation Design Charrette |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 30–60 min | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 4-8 | 10-50 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
