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 Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Lean Coffee |  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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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 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 | 60–90 min | 30-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 20-500+ | 2-8 | 3-20 | 8-80 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Prioritized Topics, Discussion Notes, Action Items | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationAutonomyDialogue | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |