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 |  Facilitation Lean Coffee |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Facilitation Open Space Technology |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30-90 min | 5-15 min | 0.5-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-20 | 3-20 | 20-500+ |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Prioritized Topics, Discussion Notes, Action Items | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationAutonomyDialogue | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy |