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 |  Knowledge Modeling Peer Instruction |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Peer Instruction uses group thinking to clarify difficult terms or concepts faster. The method combines individual reflection with social correction and shared precision. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 5-15 min | 10-20 min je Frage | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-20 | 6-50 | 5-30 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Concept Questions, Vote Results, Learning Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | LearningDialogueFacilitation | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |