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 |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Innovation Design Charrette |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 0.5-2 Tage | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 20-500+ | 4-12 | 8-80 | 10-50 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation |