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 Lean Coffee |  Facilitation Open Space Technology |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 0.5-2 Tage | 15-45 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 20-500+ | 1-3 | 8-80 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized Topics, Discussion Notes, Action Items | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationAutonomyDialogue | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |