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 |  Facilitation Barcamp |  Agile Specification by Example |  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 many people can contribute knowledge and the flow should stay open, Barcamp provides a framework for self-organized sessions. The format channels energy without defining the content too narrowly in advance. | 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 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 | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 0.5-2 Tage | Halber Tag bis 2 Tage | 60-90 min pro Feature | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 20-500+ | 15-200 | 3-6 | 8-80 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Session Board, Session Notes, Community Learnings | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | FacilitationLarge groupLearning | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |