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 Stakeholder Mapping |  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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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 | 60–90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 12-100+ | 2-8 | 8-80 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |