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 World Café |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 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 | Low | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 0.5-2 Tage | 60-180 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 20-500+ | 12-100+ | 8-80 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |