View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Innovation Round Robin Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. | With unevenly distributed speaking time, the method brings every person into the contribution one after another. It prevents early voices from setting the direction while still producing a shared idea space. This makes participation plannable and the team's diversity visible. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 10-20 min | 45-90 min | 5-15 min | 20-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-100+ | 8-80 | 3-20 | 4-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Idea List, Cluster, Shortlist |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | BrainstormingIdeationFacilitationInclusionCreativity |