View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Knowledge Modeling Feynman Technique |  Agile Sailboat Retrospective |  Operations After-Action Review |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Feynman Technique checks understanding by explaining a topic so that it stays easy for others to understand. It makes knowledge gaps visible before they become costly in everyday work. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 20-60 min | 45-90 min | 20-45 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 | 4-12 | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study Notes | Sailboat Board, Risks, Improvement Actions | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments |
Tagsno overlap | LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding | RetrospectiveTeamImprovement | LearningOperationsImprovement | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam |