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 of a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of many question cards around one challenge
Facilitation
Question Burst
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.Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely.When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
30–45 min1-2 h10-20 min15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
1-103-124-100+2-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsPolarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent ThemesQuestion List, Reframed Challenge, Learning Prompts
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
Add more methods