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 |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |  Agile 4Ls 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. | 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 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 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 | 45-90 min | 45–75 min | Up to 3 hours for a one-month Sprint; shorter Sprints are usually shorter |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 4-12 | Team members involved | Scrum Team |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Improvement actions, Team agreements |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementLearning |