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 |  Product Strategy Impact Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment 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. | When a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | 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 | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-8 | 4-12 | 12-100+ |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking |