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 Starfish Retrospective |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |  Agile Sprint 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 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 | 20-60 min | 45-90 min | 45–75 min | Up to 3 hours for a one-month Sprint; shorter Sprints are usually shorter |
Participantsdifferent | 1 | 4-12 | Team members involved | Scrum Team |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study Notes | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Improvement actions, Team agreements |
Tagsno overlap | LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementLearning |