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 |  Innovation Starbursting |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify ideas, open questions, and testable next steps in concrete terms. It opens the thinking space, collects ideas, and leads to testable options. The result is captured as a star-shaped question map, question list, and assumption list. | When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | 10-20 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 8-80 | 3-10 | 4-100+ | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |