View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations After-Action Review |  Knowledge Modeling Feynman Technique |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |  Agile Sprint Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. | The Feynman Technique checks understanding by explaining a topic so that it stays easy for others to understand. It makes knowledge gaps visible before they become costly in everyday work. | 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. | When a sprint is over and friction shouldn't simply be carried forward, it opens the view onto collaboration and patterns. It creates space to see causes and changes together. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 20-60 min | 45-90 min | Up to 3 hours for a one-month Sprint; shorter Sprints are usually shorter |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1 | 4-12 | Scrum Team |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study Notes | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Improvement actions, Team agreements |
Tagsno overlap | LearningOperationsImprovement | LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementLearning |