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 |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Facilitation World Café |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | When a group needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 2-8 | 1-8 | 12-100+ |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | SensemakingDecisionRationale | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking |