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 Open Space Technology |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |  Agile Mad Sad Glad |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time. | When a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible. | 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 | High | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 0.5-2 Tage | 45–75 min | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 20-500+ | Team members involved | 3-10 | 8-80 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | RetrospectiveTeamReflection | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |