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 for Fault Tree Analysis.
Operations
Fault Tree Analysis
Paper illustration for Round Robin Brainstorming
Innovation
Round Robin Brainstorming
Paper illustration for Reverse Brainstorming
Innovation
Reverse 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.With unevenly distributed speaking time, the method brings every person into the contribution one after another. It prevents early voices from setting the direction while still producing a shared idea space. This makes participation plannable and the team's diversity visible.For persistent errors or blockages, the method shifts the view to the opposite of the desired effect. It exposes the mechanics of failure and makes hidden causes easier to grasp. This makes improvement more concrete and the problem clearer.
Complexitydifferent
LowHighLowLow
Timedifferent
30–45 min2-6 h20-45 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
1-103-84-103-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsFault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control ActionsIdea List, Cluster, ShortlistReverse Ideas, Risk Themes, Solution Ideas
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
RiskRoot causeSafety
BrainstormingIdeationFacilitationInclusionCreativity
BrainstormingIdeationCreativityRisk
Add more methods