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 |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Innovation Rolestorming |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For a critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | When a search for ideas stalls, switching roles helps people step outside their own perspective and activate new logics of action. The method reduces habit because contributions arise from a different stance. This brings unfamiliar, often fitting solution approaches into play. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 2-6 h | 30-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 3-8 | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Rollenkarten, Ideenpool pro Rolle, Konsolidierte Shortlist | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | RiskRoot causeSafety | BrainstormingIdeationCreativity | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |