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 Timeline |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a project, incident, or change process is only remembered in fragments, Timeline brings the sequence back into a readable form. It makes turning points, precursors, and after-effects recognizable over the course of time. | 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. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 45-90 min | 5-15 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 8-80 | 3-20 | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Timeline, Milestones, Insight Notes | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tags1 shared | TimelineFacilitationSequence | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |