View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Domain Modeling Context Map |  Agile Sprint Retrospective |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several contexts need to talk to each other, it makes their relationships and dependencies legible. It helps sort integration pressure and responsibilities across system boundaries. | 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. | 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 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 | 1-3 h | Up to 3 hours for a one-month Sprint; shorter Sprints are usually shorter | 45–75 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | Scrum Team | Team members involved | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Context Map, Integration Patterns, Boundary Notes | Improvement actions, Team agreements | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments |
Tagsno overlap | Domain-Driven DesignBoundariesStrategy | RetrospectiveImprovementLearning | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam |