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 Dot Voting |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |  Facilitation World Café |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 45-90 min | 10-20 min | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 8-80 | 4-100+ | 12-100+ |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking |