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 |  Innovation How Might We |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction. | When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30–45 min | 10-20 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 1-10 | 4-100+ |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | FacilitationInclusionIdeation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
