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 |  Business Strategy GAP Analysis |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | GAP Analysis compares the current state with a target picture and makes the distance manageable. It becomes useful when, ahead of new initiatives, it must become clear which capabilities, processes, or resources are missing. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-8 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options | Gap Matrix, Action Plan, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning | StrategyAnalysisPlanning | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |