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 Expectation Mapping |  Operations Learning Review |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |  Agile Sprint Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | After a project phase with mixed results, the method makes learning from the individual case reusable. It connects events, decisions, and systemic conditions into robust insights. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | Up to 3 hours for a one-month Sprint; shorter Sprints are usually shorter |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 4-12 | Scrum Team |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Learning Review Notes, System Factors, Improvement Actions | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Improvement actions, Team agreements |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | LearningRetrospectiveIncidentOperations | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementLearning |