How Might We… Craft Better HMW Statements?
As designers, we come in contact with ample methods, tools, and canvases promising to improve creativity and problem-solving. Amidst the sea of options, the simple “How Might We” (HMW) statement stands out for its simplicity, versatility, and power to truly influence the outcome of a design project. When used well, HMW statements help engineers reframe ambiguous problems into clear, opportunity-driven starting points for ideation. Unfortunately, when used poorly, they lead to shallow insights and cause a false sense of design formality when the engineer merely has an idea in search of a problem. This article breaks down what makes a good HMW statement and how engineers can use them effectively in their design process.
What is a How Might We Statement?
An HMW statement is a clear sentence prepared before ideation to orient the team toward the specific design problem. It is a deliberately open-ended question that frames a design challenge in a positive and thought-provoking way.
As a design tool, HMW statements originated from Osborn and Parnes at BBDO – an advertising company [1, 2] – and were introduced into the creative practices at Procter & Gamble in the 1970s [3]. The HMW tool was later popularized by design thinking practitioners at IDEO [4].
A 1950’s ideation meeting at the BBDO New York office. Photo © Philippe Halsman
The HMW structure follows a simple formula:
How might we [do something desirable (verb)] for [a user or stakeholder] so that [desired outcome]?
This format invites exploration without prematurely locking into a specific solution. For example, consider the framing of the design problem when using HMW statements, as shown in the following examples:
Manufacturing example:
Rather than saying, “We need to design a faster conveyor system,” a design team might ask, “How might we reduce material transfer time for production teams so that overall workstation efficiency is improved?” The shift moves the conversation from a specific solution to a broader opportunity for process improvement.
Mechanical systems example:
Instead of declaring, “We need to improve the durability of this linkage,” a team could ask, “How might we extend the operational lifespan for high-cycle mechanical systems so that they require less frequent maintenance or replacement?” The subtle reframing unlocks a wider range of creative possibilities.
Consumer product example:
Rather than stating, “We need to build a lighter drone frame,” designers might ask, “How might we improve flight efficiency for drone operators in high-wind environments so that their devices remain stable and energy-efficient during missions?” That slight shift in wording expands the design space from weight reduction alone to multiple possible performance improvements.
Why HMW Statements Work
The power of HMW statements comes from three psychological shifts they create:
Optimism: The word “might” signals possibility without pressure. It invites creativity rather than demanding certainty [4].
Framing: By asking a question, designers naturally adopt a mindset of inquiry, which has been shown leads to more divergent thinking [5].
Focus: HMW statements create useful boundaries around a problem, ensuring ideas are relevant without being overly constrained [6].
For engineers, who often default to solving before framing, these shifts are essential for maintaining openness in early-stage design.
Common HMW Pitfalls
Not all HMW statements are created equal [1, 7]. Here are common mistakes that dilute their effectiveness:
Too Broad: “How might we make life better for everyone?” is inspiring but useless.
Too Narrow: “How might we reduce bolt shear stress by 15% in bracket B72?” leaves virtually no room for exploration.
Solution-Biased: “How might we design an app to…?” assumes a solution format before exploring the problem.
Lacking User Focus: Statements without a clear user or stakeholder often miss the mark.
Effective HMW statements strike a balance: specific enough to be actionable, yet open enough to invite creativity.
Writing Better HMW Statements
Good HMW statements often follow three guidelines [8]:
Frame the Opportunity: Focus on needs, not solutions. For example, “How might we improve confidence in do-it-yourself home repairs for first-time homeowners?”
Anchor in Insights: Base the statement on a real observation or user needs uncovered through design research (observations, interviews, participatory studies, etc.).
Allow for Multiple Solutions: A well-written HMW should allow a design team to generate many diverse ideas that can satisfy the HMW statement.
Below are some simple before-and-after examples. It is worth noting that the transition from Bad to Better HMW statements typically involves asking the question: “Why do we want ____ (add the operational part of the bad statement)?” So, for the first example below, why do we want a more efficient solar panel mount? The answer to that question generally leads to a more abstracted need void of a particular solution, in this specific case – because we want to simplify installation on uneven surfaces. The transition from Better to Best is also important as it ensures the problem is human-centered.
Energy System Example
Bad: How might we create a more efficient solar panel mount?
Better: How might we simplify solar panel installation on uneven surfaces?
Best: How might we simplify solar panel installation for field technicians on uneven surfaces so that setup is faster and more reliable?
Student Project Example
Bad: How might we build a quieter dorm chair?
Better: How might we reduce distraction from creaky furniture during late-night study sessions?
Best: How might we reduce furniture noise for dorm students during late-night study sessions so that they can focus without distraction?
Fluid System Example
Bad: How might we design a better pipe fitting?
Better: How might we minimize installation errors in high-pressure piping systems?
Best: How might we minimize installation errors for plumbers and technicians working with high-pressure piping systems so that system reliability improves under operational loads?
Product Testing Example
Bad: How might we automate the product durability test?
Better: How might we help engineers identify product weaknesses faster and earlier in development?
Best: How might we accelerate failure detection for product engineers during early-stage testing so that design iterations can happen sooner and with better data?
HVAC System Example
Bad: How might we design a quieter fan blade?
Better: How might we improve comfort in office spaces by reducing noise from air handling systems?
Best: How might we reduce air handling noise for office workers so that indoor environments feel more comfortable and less distracting?
Mobility Device Example
Bad: How might we create a lighter wheelchair frame?
Better: How might we make self-propelled wheelchairs less fatiguing for users during daily activities?
Best: How might we reduce propulsion effort for wheelchair users during daily activities so that they experience less fatigue and greater independence?
Bicycle Design Example
Bad: How might we make a cheaper carbon fiber bike?
Better: How might we make long-distance cycling more accessible to casual riders?
Best: How might we improve long-distance cycling accessibility for casual riders so that they can enjoy the benefits of performance bikes without high cost or discomfort?
Power Tool Example
Bad: How might we design a more compact cordless drill?
Better: How might we make it easier to drill in tight spaces without compromising torque?
Best: How might we improve ease-of-use for cordless drill users in tight spaces so that they can maintain torque performance without tool repositioning?
Composites Manufacturing Example
Bad: How might we improve resin flow in the mold?
Better: How might we reduce defects in complex composite parts during layup and curing?
Best: How might we reduce layup defects for composites technicians during curing of complex parts so that product quality and yield improve?
Practice Tips for Engineers
In engineering design teams, HMW statements work best when used collaboratively during problem framing or design reviews. Starting with user insights, write multiple drafts of HMWs, and test their usefulness by quickly seeing if they can lead to a diverse set of high-quality ideas. Consider posting your top three HMW statements in your workspace—they are your team’s north star during concept generation. Like all design artifacts, HMW statements should be refined, updated, and referred to throughout the entirety of the design process.
Conclusions
HMW Statements are succinct statements about the framing of the design problem. Get this wrong and it doesn’t matter how creative, analytical, fast, or prolific you are – you’ll be solving the wrong problem. The construction of the HMW statement, therefore, is a huge opportunity to get it right and get everyone on the design team headed in a useful direction. For engineers, the value of a HMW statement is even greater since it is tempting for us to define the problem by jumping straight to solution specifications and constraints. HMW statements remind us that the best designs start with open questions, — not closed answers.
References
[1] Wang, T. (2021). “Design Thinking’s Most Popular Strategy is BS”. Fast Company, 28 June 2021, https://www.fastcompany.com/90649969/the-most-popular-design-thinking-strategy-is-bs
[2] Dugan, M. et al. (2017). Creative Problem Solving: A quick and dirty handbook, 2017, Knowinnovation and Inclusive Innovation, https://brdo.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/cps_handbook.pdf
[3] Kelley, T., & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative Confidence. Crown Business.
[4] Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design. HarperBusiness.
[5] Liedtka, J. (2015). Perspective: Linking Design Thinking with Innovation Outcomes through Cognitive Bias Reduction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 925-938.
[6] Doorley, S., Holcomb, S., Klebahn, P., Segovia, K., & Utley, J. (2018). Design Thinking Bootleg. Stanford d.school.
[7] R. Bolton, (2021) “How Might We” is not BS. How We Use It Is. Mile Zero. 15 July 2021, https://www.milezero.io/2021/07/15/how-might-we-bs/
[8] IDEO.org. (2015). The Field Guide to Human-Centered Design. IDEO.org.
To cite this article:
Mattson, Chris. “How Might We… Craft Better HMW Statements.” The BYU Design Review, 4 August 2025, https://www.designreview.byu.edu/collections/how-might-we-craft-better-hmw-statements.
