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 |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Question Burst |  Innovation SCAMPER |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation. | For an existing solution under pressure to change, the method deliberately opens space for systematic variants. It directs attention to rebuilding, combining, and repurposing rather than only new basic ideas. This produces concrete evolution paths for products, offerings, or workflows. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 60-120 min | 15-30 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 5-12 | 2-8 | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Question List, Reframed Challenge, Learning Prompts | SCAMPER Idea List, Concept Shortlist, Variation Notes |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityReframingInnovation |