methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration for Open Space Technology.
Facilitation
Open Space Technology
Paper illustration for World Café.
Facilitation
World Café
Paper illustration for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
Purposedifferent
Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely.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 group needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity.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
MediumHighMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h0.5-2 Tage60-180 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-1220-500+12-100+8-80
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsSession Marketplace, Proceedings, Action TopicsTable Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared QuestionsDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy
FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
Add more methods