methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper session grid with two time blocks, three rooms, colored session cards and an open topic pool.
Facilitation
Barcamp
Paper illustration for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
Purposedifferent
When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.When many people can contribute knowledge and the flow should stay open, Barcamp provides a framework for self-organized sessions. The format channels energy without defining the content too narrowly in advance.When a controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
10-20 min5-15 minHalber Tag bis 2 Tage45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-100+3-2015-2008-80
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent ThemesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistSession Board, Session Notes, Community LearningsDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions
Tags1 shared
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationLarge groupLearning
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
Add more methods