View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Operations After-Action Review |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |  Agile Sprint Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice. | 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. | 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 | 45-90 min | 20-45 min | 45-90 min | Up to 3 hours for a one-month Sprint; shorter Sprints are usually shorter |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-12 | 4-12 | Scrum Team |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Improvement actions, Team agreements |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | LearningOperationsImprovement | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementLearning |