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 |  Agile Specification by Example |  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 business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | 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 |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-6 | 12-100+ |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
