Your Partner for a Brighter Future
Innovation Sprint vs Design Sprint: Which is right for you?
Learn the difference between innovation sprints and design sprints, when to use them, and how they help teams solve problems faster and smarter.
Learn the difference between innovation sprints and design sprints, when to use them, and how they help teams solve problems faster and smarter.
Choosing the right sprint for your team could make the difference between going in circles or making meaningful progress.
This blog discusses the two most common sprint methodologies used in digital product and innovation work. Namely, the innovation sprint and the design sprint.
While both accelerate progress, they solve different problems. Understanding when to use each is essential for teams that want to work smarter, not harder.
We’ll cover what each sprint is, when to use them, how they differ, common mistakes, and how to embed them into your business' workflow.
An innovation sprint is a concentrated effort where a cross-functional team works together over a defined period (typically 1 to 2 weeks) to develop, refine or explore a new idea, concept or strategy.
The aim is not to finalise a product or launch something, but to remove complexity, uncover insights, and lay the foundation for future work.
During an innovation sprint, the team might:
Unlike typical workshops or brainstorming sessions, innovation sprints are structured and time-boxed.
They often follow an adapted version of the Design Thinking model:
Although, there is a greater emphasis on exploration than validation.
Innovation sprints are best used when you need to:
They’re particularly useful for organisations launching a new venture, entering a new market, or looking to reposition their offering in a competitive space.
The goal is progress, not perfection.
The innovation sprint process is built around structured exploration, experimentation and reflection.
Below we've outlined a typical sequence:
Follow these innovation sprint guidelines to keep the team aligned:
If you’re struggling to imagine what an innovation sprint could focus on, here are a few ideas that have worked for others:
Let's imagine some real or stylised innovation sprint examples in action.
1. A transport app reimagines the commuter journey
During peak times, a mobility company noticed users were leaving their app. They held an innovation sprint to find ways to help users navigate different types of transport.
The sprint produced a service concept integrating buses, bikes and walking data.
2. A bank tackles financial wellbeing
A retail bank used an innovation sprint to explore what "financial wellness" could mean to young adults. The outcome was a concept for an app-based money coach that later evolved into a full pilot.
3. A software company builds its first hardware prototype
A B2B SaaS company used an innovation sprint to investigate how physical sensors could enhance their analytics product. They created a proof-of-concept using off-the-shelf hardware components.
A design sprint is a tightly scoped process that usually lasting five days. It helps teams rapidly prototype and test ideas with real users.
Popularised by Google Ventures, it quickly became a go-to method for solving design and usability problems, without the risk of building the wrong thing.
A typical five-day design sprint process follows a clear structure:
Design sprints are ideal when you already know the problem but don’t yet know the best way to solve it.
They let you fast-track months of work into a single, focused week.
Key scenarios where a design sprint methodology works well:
The result is a validated prototype and clear insights into what works, what doesn’t, and what needs rethinking.
Jake Knapp of Google Ventures developed the first design sprint to help startups quickly answer critical business questions. Teams across Google, Airbnb, Slack, and beyond have since adopted it.
What made it popular was its structure, rigid enough to provide clarity, but flexible enough to adapt. Google showed that even enterprise businesses can solve important problems in just five days.
The Sprint book (by Knapp, Zeratsky, and Kowitz) codified the process and made it accessible for product teams globally. Many consultancies and agencies now use the "Google design sprint" as a standard format for client workshop
While innovation sprints and design sprints both aim to solve problems and accelerate progress, they differ significantly in their purpose, structure, and outputs.
Innovation sprints are open-ended. They help teams make sense of uncertainty and identify new opportunities. The emphasis is on idea generation and exploration rather than delivery. These sprints ask, "What could we do?"
In contrast, design sprints are focused. The team starts with a clearly defined problem and aims to test a specific solution.
They’re used when there’s already consensus on the direction, and the sprint is used to ask, "Will this work for users?"
Innovation sprints thrive in ambiguity. You might be exploring a market shift, a change in customer behaviour, or the potential of a new technology. Rarely is there a clear answer at the start.
Design sprints require precision. The problem has been defined, the context is understood, and the focus is on execution and validation. The team is solving a known issue.
Innovation sprints usually involve a wider mix of participants - strategists, product leads, customer experts, designers, and engineers, since the issues are bigger in scope.
Design sprints typically involve fewer people in tightly defined roles, with strong design and research capabilities at the core. Tools used lean heavily towards prototyping and user feedback platforms.
An innovation sprint might end with:
A design sprint should end with:
Each type of sprint plays a different role in product or service development.
Innovation sprints are a compass.
Design sprints are a map.
Both innovation and design sprints share core principles with agile methodologies. In fact, you can see them as short, focused bursts of agile work before the development team begins formal delivery.
Innovation sprints often sit within a larger agile innovation programme. They help teams explore new ideas without the pressure of immediately scaling.
Through working in iterations, teams can test concepts, discard weak directions quickly, and retain the most promising ones.
Design sprints support agile delivery by ensuring teams validate ideas before investing engineering time. The outputs of a design sprint feed directly into backlog grooming and sprint planning.
Running agile sprints also means embracing iteration. A single sprint may not answer everything, but it sets a direction that teams can build upon in future sprints or agile releases.
Knowing when to deploy an innovation sprint versus a design sprint can save time, effort, and budget.
The decision hinges on your challenge’s level of clarity and how far along you are in the product or strategy lifecycle.
Use an innovation sprint if:
Use a design sprint if:
Understanding this difference helps teams avoid wasting time on validating ideas that they haven’t explored deeply enough or on exploring problems that they have already defined clearly.
While startups often move quickly, larger organisations face unique constraints: silos, slow decision-making, competing priorities, and complex governance.
That doesn’t mean sprints won’t work, it just means they need tailoring.
To run effective sprints in enterprise settings:
You may also need to clarify who owns the outcomes.
In large teams, ideas can fall through the cracks unless someone is accountable for next steps.
AI tools can support sprint processes without replacing human creativity.
Used well, they help with speed, consistency and reducing manual effort.
In an innovation sprint, AI can:
In a design sprint, AI might:
These tools are not a substitute for team input, but they reduce friction so teams can focus on higher-value decisions.
Not every sprint leads to strong outcomes. Some fizzle out, others never get off the ground.
Avoiding common mistakes starts with knowing what typically goes wrong.
Lack of focus: If the sprint begins without a clearly framed challenge, the team wastes time circling general ideas. Spending time upfront to agree on the sprint question is essential. This gives the team purpose and boundaries.
Too many people or opinions: Larger teams introduce noise. When everyone wants a say, the decision-making process slows. Keep the sprint team tight and clearly define roles. Invite broader stakeholders to review at defined checkpoints.
No next steps: Some sprints end in a flurry of post-its, and then nothing happens. Without a clear plan to carry momentum forward, the team loses the value of the sprint. Assign responsibilities before the sprint ends for what comes next.
Poor facilitation: Whether innovation or design, sprints need a strong facilitator. Someone must steer the team, manage the clock, and ensure that they make progress. Without one, sessions drift and energy drops.
Set up your sprint with these in mind and your team has a much higher chance of making real progress.
The most overlooked part of any sprint is what happens once it’s over.
No matter how promising the outcomes, they don’t turn into impact unless you follow through.
The sprint should conclude with tangible outcomes—concepts, prototypes, user insights. You need to review, prioritise, and map these onto your broader roadmap. This ensures they don’t sit in a folder untouched.
Bring the wider team into the loop. Share what you tested, what you learned, and what the implications are for future work. Transparency builds trust and keeps everyone aligned.
Rarely is a sprint the final word. Insights gathered often point towards more questions. Be ready to run additional experiments or short follow-ups to iterate on the idea or solution.
Sprints generate energy. Use that to fuel the next stage of delivery or exploration. Capture the team’s reflections before they move on and recognise what went well. It helps embed sprint culture long term.
Sprints are just one tool in a much larger problem-solving toolbox.
They offer specific advantages that make them ideal for certain challenges, but not every situation.
Versus traditional workshops: Workshops are great for aligning people and generating ideas. But they often stop short of testing or creating tangible outcomes. Sprints go further by turning ideas into prototypes or testable concepts.
Versus agile development: Agile delivery is about continuous improvement, shipping in cycles, and responding to feedback. Sprints precede that. They help determine what to backlog in the first place. They test assumptions before build begins.
Versus hackathons: Hackathons are energy-rich but can lack direction. They reward speed and often skip over user needs. Sprints are slower, more structured, and focused on solving real problems in a validated way.
Versus business case development: Instead of relying on assumptions and forecasts, sprints help build confidence by creating evidence. They reduce the risks of ideas before anyone writes the formal business case.
Knowing when to use a sprint and when another approach is more appropriate is as important as knowing how to run one. A sprint isn’t always the answer, but it’s one of the sharpest tools in the kit when used well.
A sprint can be a powerful tool, but only when set up and run the right way.
That’s where we help bring value to our digital partners.
Here’s how we help achieve sprint success:
In-short, we don’t just help you run the sprint.
We help ensure it fits into your wider digital transformation strategy.
Choosing between a design sprint and an innovation sprint shouldn’t feel like a gamble. The right choice depends on your challenge, your goals, and the level of clarity you already have.
If you’re trying to work out what to build, start with an innovation sprint.
If you’re ready to test how to build it, go with a design sprint.
Although, if you’re not sure where to start, don’t worry. That’s what we’re here for.
Let’s discuss how your business can work through uncertainty with purpose, and make the next move with clarity.
You may also like
