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 |  Decision Making Pre-Mortem |  Growth A/B Testing |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 20–45 min | 1-4 Wochen | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Small cross-functional group | 1-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Risk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption log | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | RiskDecisionFailurePlanning | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |