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 Fishbowl Discussion |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Open Space Technology |  Facilitation Lean Coffee |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | 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 without a fixed agenda needs to get into useful conversations quickly, Lean Coffee structures the start around interests rather than a presentation. The group itself negotiates which topics get time first and which wait. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 0.5-2 Tage | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 4-12 | 20-500+ | 3-20 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Prioritized Topics, Discussion Notes, Action Items |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | FacilitationAutonomyDialogue |