View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking CATWOE Analysis |  Facilitation World Café |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way. | When a group needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60-180 min | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 12-100+ | 2-8 | 8-80 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |