Organizing for idea generation is a challenge for firms that face intensive innovation challenges. Many methodologies have been proposed to help teams generate creative ideas, however few studies aim at assessing the performance of ideation methodologies. We suggest that such gap in the literature remains due to a lack of analytical framework to describe, evaluate and even compare idea generation methodologies. The aim of this paper is to propose such framework: we build on the existing literature on ideation to propose that any tool or method supporting idea generation should be evaluated on its capability to support (1) the interactions among actors, (2) the creativity of the generated ideas and (3) the management of both new and already existing knowledge. We then apply this framework on one specific idea generation methodology, a Serious Game, consisting in giving participants specific profiles and instructing them to develop innovative proposals that hold value for the role they impersonate. Our framework allowed to identify the strengths and areas of improvement of the Serious Game and made it possible to reflect on the potential of this ideation methodology. The framework proposed in this paper would enable practitioners to assess the performance of different idea generation methods in order to help them choose among a panel of existing tools depending on the goals and contexts in which they are used. This article describes as well a characterization of Serious Games, which is a methodology that has been gaining momentum for the last few years but that still lacks academic work.