methodatlas
RunsheetInnovation

Morphological Analysis

ComplexityMedium
Time1-3 h
Participants2-8
FormatWorkshop + async
MaturityCanonical
01

Prerequisite

What needs to be finished first

Complete firstProblem Framing Workshopnot in catalog

The problem to solve is clearly formulated and has at least three independent variable dimensions.

Without: Without variable dimensions, the method becomes a linear idea list and produces no meaningful combinations.
02

Preparation

What needs to be ready before start

Materials

Table (spreadsheet or Miro board) with one row per dimension and multiple columns for value options; pens; markers for selected combinations; timer.

People / roles

One facilitator who sharply defines dimensions and guides combinations; two to eight participants with domain and solution knowledge; one scribe for concept shortlist.

Pre-read

Problem statement as one sentence; known existing solutions for inspiration and scope boundaries; hard constraints (budget, regulation, technology); definition of what counts as "interesting" for later selection.

Time needed

1-3 h

Setup

Prepare table, write problem statement at the top. Fill one initial dimension as an example so the format is understood. State rule: dimensions first, then options, then combinations.

03

Core question

The one question this method answers

Which novel solution combinations emerge when all relevant dimensions of the problem are systematically cross-combined?

04

Flow

Marker: Phase

StepDurationActionHint
1Phase 1: Define dimensions
20-30 minCollect 4-7 dimensions together that characterize the problem independently (for example target group, trigger, format, monetization model, channel). Resolve redundancies until each dimension is orthogonal to the others.If two dimensions define each other (for example channel and device), they are not independent. Merge or split them.
2Phase 2: Collect options
30-45 minCreate 4-8 options per dimension. Allow even unusual alternatives. Avoid a generic "misc" entry per dimension and use concrete examples instead.If a dimension has fewer than three options, it is either too narrow or a binary decision that does not belong in the matrix.
3Phase 3: Form combinations
30-45 minGenerate 10-20 combinations randomly or via guided choice, each with one option per dimension. Write a short concept sentence for each combination.The concept sentence must be understandable without re-reading the table. Even if the concept sounds absurd, note it first—reframing in Phase 4 can rescue it.
4Phase 4: Filter and shortlist
20-30 minEvaluate each concept for plausibility, feasibility, and novelty (for example with three symbols). Remove implausible ideas and develop 3-5 concepts for shortlist.Strictly separate "not feasible" from "unusual." The latter is often exactly what the method is for.
05

Artifact

What comes out at the end

Form

Morphological matrix as table plus separate document with concept statements, evaluation, and shortlist; shortlist includes concept name, combined options, rationale, and next step.

Versioning / ownership

One entry per iteration with date and problem framing. If dimensions or options change, do not overwrite old matrix; create a v2 and document delta.

Tool alternatives
  • Google Sheet or Excel with color marking
  • Miro with matrix template
  • Airtable for structured combinations
  • Markdown table in repo under docs/explorations/

morphological-analysis-working-template.md

Compact working template for Morphological Analysis with dimensions, combinations, and concept shortlist.

Morphological Analysis Working Template

Goal

Combine different solution dimensions in a structured way to explore new concepts.

Context

Which problem space or design challenge should the group structure?

Input

  • Problem statement:
  • Dimensions:
  • Known options:
  • Constraints:

Working area

  • Dimension 1 options:
  • Dimension 2 options:
  • Dimension 3 options:
  • Combination matrix:
  • Screening criteria:

Output artifacts

  • Morphological box:
  • Concept combinations:
  • Concept shortlist:

Open questions

  • ...

Decision / next step

Owner, date, and success signal.

06

Example output

Concrete filled scenario, fictional example

morphological-analysis-beispiel.md

Concrete filled scenario, fictional example

Morphological Analysis — New coaching format for solo tax advisors (15.05.2026)

Problem: Which coaching format best fits solo tax advisors like Sabine, who balance client work and acquisition?

Dimensions and options:

DimensionOptions
Format1:1, group of 3, peer learning, self-study
Rhythm15 min daily, 60 min weekly, 4 h monthly
ChannelAudio, video, text chat, onsite
Pricingsubscription, pay-per-session, revenue share, free plus tools

Concept 7 (Shortlist): Peer learning + daily 15 min + audio + subscription. "Three solo tax advisors form an audio learning group, listen to each other's questions and answers daily for 15 min, and pay 29 EUR/month." Owner: @anna, smoke test by 30.05.

07

Pitfalls

Recognize symptoms and steer against them

Trap

Dimensions are not independent

Symptom

Some combinations are logically impossible because two dimensions define each other.

What to do

Re-cut or remove dimensions. For each dimension, check whether each option can combine with every option from every other dimension.

Trap

Too many dimensions

Symptom

Table has 8+ dimensions, combination count explodes, no concept is elaborated.

What to do

Limit to max 6 dimensions. Anything that does not fit in the matrix becomes a constraint or assumption in the header.

Trap

Prematurely discarding unusual combinations

Symptom

Participants discard concepts in Phase 3 with "that does not work" before fully articulating them.

What to do

Apply a rule to discard only in Phase 4. In Phase 3, every combination is written as a sentence.

Trap

Concept statements are just item lists

Symptom

Instead of a readable sentence, only "audio + daily + subscription" is written in a column.

What to do

Require each concept to be a full sentence with actor and benefit. Otherwise later no one can understand what it meant.

Trap

No shortlist owners

Symptom

Workshop ends with 5 exciting concepts, but no one takes follow-up ownership.

What to do

Do not end Phase 4 before each shortlist concept has a named owner and next step with date.

08

Stop criteria

Done signals checkable in under a minute

Fewer than three independent dimensions can be identified; the method cannot produce a combination space.
Fewer than three options per dimension, matrix is too small for meaningful combinations.
Participants lack domain familiarity and options are entirely speculative.
Workshop is shorter than 60 min, making four phases impossible.
Problem is binary or already prioritized; combination thinking creates pseudo-options.
No decision authority for shortlist in room; concepts remain theory.

Finished the runsheet?

Go to the profile for purpose, similar methods, and sources or continue to the next method in the catalog.