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 scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
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 many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
30–45 min60-90 min1-2 h10-20 min
Participantsdifferent
1-102-104-124-100+
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsRICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
Add more methods