Create Effective How Might We Statements

Learning Objectives

After completing this unit, you’ll be able to:

Define How Might We (HMW) statements.
Explain why we use How Might We statements in the strategy design process.
Describe different uses of How Might We statements across the strategy design process.
Describe the process for creating HMWs.
Explain what makes a good HMW question.
Identify pitfalls to watch out for when creating an HMW question.

What Are How Might We Statements?

A How Might We (HMW) statement turns your challenge framing into a question that can be solved. It turns problems into opportunities for generative thinking and organizes how you think about the problem and possible solutions. It starts with a call to action, and in moments of ambiguity, it guides you in how to push your design.

The format is three simple words, but it’s also intentional. How suggests that the problem can be solved, Might allows us to imagine or explore possibilities without committing to them, and We acknowledges it’s going to take a collaborative effort.

A good How Might We statement unifies the team with a common purpose, jump starts the strategy design process with a question that generates many different solution pathways, and inspires teams to think creatively. It puts designers in a question-framing mindset and makes them challenge any assumptions. It turns the problem into an opportunity and assumes that no one can solve it alone. But most importantly, it reminds designers to place humans at the center of the solution.

Example of challenge framing using the How Might We (HMW) question template.

Different Uses of HMW Statements

A key craft of the strategy designer is creating and refining HMW statements throughout the strategy design process. Because they are used to clarify the opportunity for design, they are regularly revisited throughout the strategy design process and have different uses at different phases.

Challenge framing and scoping: Clarify the project’s purpose and unify the design team with a common challenge to solve.
Synthesis: Articulate opportunities for design after new insights/findings have emerged from users to guide the ideation and concepting phases.
Ideation: Generate ideas around specific aspects of the larger design challenge. You create many HMW statements and use several per brainstorm or ideation session.
Iterating: Guide iterations in prototyping to see if the prototype answered the question, and refine it as you learn new findings from users to refine the question.

Using HMWs to Frame a Challenge

A good How Might We question is essential to arriving at a good solution because it allows for focus and creative exploration. Here’s how you craft a successful HMW statement.

Write down your problem statement. Based on your answer to your questions when framing the challenge, what is the problem you’re trying to solve?
Draft your design challenge using the phrase “How Might We.” For that first draft, take your problem statement and add “How Might We” to it.
Identify the impact. State the key outcome you’re trying to achieve by answering the question, “If we solve this problem, the impact will be ____.” You can then use that impact to test the design challenge and refine the statement.
Test the design challenge. Test the How Might We by brainstorming as many solutions as possible. If the How Might We isn’t generating many solutions for the intended impact, continue refining it until you find the solutions that will achieve your desired impact.
Refine the problem and impact. Beyond considering the impact, write down important content aspects or constraints you need to consider, like shifts you need to see in the ecosystem around the user or factors that are technological, geographic, time-based considerations, and so on.
Try again. Rewrite your How Might We statement and go through the testing process again.

What Makes a Good HMW Question?

If your HMW question doesn’t bring you closer to solving your design, it’s useless. Use these questions to help you assess the HMW’s effectiveness.

Is it generative? Can you get to five solutions quickly that solve for the intended impact?
Is it accessible? Can someone outside your team generate solutions quickly for the intended impact?
Is it too narrow? Is the solution already stated in the framing, making it hard to discover various solution pathways?
Is it too broad? Is the solution like a boiling ocean, with so many solutions that you can’t begin to problem solve?
Does it contain a desired outcome? Can you understand what success would look like based on the statement?

Pitfalls When Creating an HMW Question

Developing a good HMW statement isn’t easy. It’s an iterative process, requiring several rounds of reframing. When coming up with HMW questions, don’t be afraid to go for quantity and then test them out. And watch out for these pitfalls.

Common Mistake	Ineffective HMW	Effective HMW	Why?
Including the solution.	How might we create a website for customer service requests?	How might we make customer service more available to customers?	Ineffective example only invites ideas that are websites and only for customer service requests.
Using the words design, build, create, or similar ones.	How might we build an experience that enables users to express themselves by codesigning a custom shoe?	How might we enable users to express themselves by codesigning a custom shoe?	Ineffective example focuses on the act of designing or building instead of on the user outcome.
Providing too much context.	How might we reassure website users by telling them when their package will arrive?	How might we reassure users that we’re working on their orders?	Ineffective example shuts down creative thinking because it’s too narrow.
Failing to include the desired outcome.	How might we improve the waiting period between order and delivery for customers?	How might we increase visibility into our manufacturing, shipping, and delivery processes to help customers better understand the wait?	Ineffective example has a vague outcome—the word improve is not descriptive enough.
Focusing on what you do not want.	How might we remove friction from our ordering process for custom items?	How might we make ordering custom items as quick and easy as possible?	Ineffective example doesn’t give the brainstormers something to aim for.

A pro tip for refining a How Might We statement when you face pitfalls is to:

Ladder it up. If it’s too narrow in scope, try to broaden it.
Ladder it down. If it’s too broad in scope, try to narrow it down into smaller problems.

With your How Might We statement in hand, your team has a common purpose and can use their energies to find multiple creative solutions to the design challenge. Speaking of team, we help you put together the right project team to solve your challenge in the next unit. But first, let’s see how Cloud Kicks is doing with its supply chain challenge.

The Cloud Kicks Challenge

When framing the challenge, the Cloud Kicks strategy designer took the need the CEO shared, and reframed it as the question, “How might we fix the supply chain challenge?” However, when testing potential solutions, that challenge was unsolvable. There was no way Cloud Kicks could control global slow downs. So the strategy designer laddered down, collaborating with a customer service team member who had ideas for how to strengthen customer relationships.

The result was, “How might we create customer service scripts to answer questions on sneaker delivery?” This question, however, was not generative and already had the solution in it. Trying once again, the strategy designer laddered back up. This time, the strategist considered the desired impact on both the Cloud Kicks brand and its West Coast influencers. The question that best articulated the need was, “How might we turn customers into fans amidst supply chain disruption?” This framed the challenge to help scope the project and identify the team to help solve it.