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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
Paper illustration for Round Robin Brainstorming
Innovation
Round Robin 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.When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.When a controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
30–45 min60-120 min45-90 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
1-105-128-804-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up QuestionsIdea List, Cluster, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
BrainstormingIdeationFacilitationInclusionCreativity
Add more methods