Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Selected:ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)4Ls Retrospective Sailboat Retrospective Starfish Retrospective

Criterion	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Agile 4Ls Retrospective	Agile Sailboat Retrospective	Agile Starfish Retrospective
Purposedifferent	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 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 team wants to read momentum, brakes, and risks together, it offers an easily understandable picture of the situation. It makes drive, obstacles, and headwind visible in the same picture.	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	Medium	Low	Low	Low
Timedifferent	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	45–75 min	45-90 min	45-90 min
Participantsdifferent	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	Team members involved	4-12	4-12
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop	Workshop
Outputdifferent	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions	Sailboat Board, Risks, Improvement Actions	Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam	RetrospectiveTeamImprovement	RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam

Add more methods