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 |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Agile Mad Sad Glad |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | When a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–75 min | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Team members involved | 8-80 | 3-10 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items |
Tagsno overlap | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | RetrospectiveTeamReflection |