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 Open Space Technology |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 0.5-2 Tage | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 20-500+ | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
