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 Delegation Poker |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  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 decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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 | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-10 | 3-10 | 3-20 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Prioritized Topics, Discussion Notes, Action Items |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | AutonomyRolesTeam | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | FacilitationAutonomyDialogue |