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 Troika Consulting |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  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 someone needs to sort out a concrete work problem, Troika Consulting offers fast peer consulting with a tight focus. The method brings perspectives together without taking responsibility out of the person's hands. | 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 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 | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 30-45 min | 45-90 min | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 3-30 | 8-80 | 12-100+ |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Advice Notes, Next Actions, Peer Insights | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationCoachingLearning | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking |