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 |  Agile Example 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 a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | 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 | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | 0.5-2 Tage | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-7 | 20-500+ | 3-20 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Prioritized Topics, Discussion Notes, Action Items |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | FacilitationAutonomyDialogue |