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 of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
Paper illustration for Open Space Technology.
Facilitation
Open Space Technology
Paper session grid with two time blocks, three rooms, colored session cards and an open topic pool.
Facilitation
Barcamp
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 a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min45-90 min0.5-2 TageHalber Tag bis 2 Tage
Participantsdifferent
3-208-8020-500+15-200
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up QuestionsSession Marketplace, Proceedings, Action TopicsSession Board, Session Notes, Community Learnings
Tags1 shared
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy
FacilitationLarge groupLearning
Add more methods