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 |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation World Café |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 1-8 | 5-30 | 12-100+ |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | SensemakingDecisionRationale | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking |