View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. | When improvement options need to be sorted more finely than just start and stop, it brings observations into clear kinds of action. This makes visible what should be done more, less, newly, or continued. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–75 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Team members involved | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments |
Tagsno overlap | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
