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 Dot Voting |  Facilitation Open Space Technology |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 5-15 min | 0.5-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-20 | 20-500+ |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
