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 |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 1-3 h | 45-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 3-8 | 2-8 | 1-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | FailureResilienceRisk | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis |