methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
How Might We
Innovation
How Might We
A structured reflection surfaces what was liked, learned, lacked, and longed for. It is a conversation format and does not validate actions automatically.
Agile
4Ls Retrospective
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for Mad Sad Glad
Agile
Mad Sad Glad
Purposedifferent
With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction.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 it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences.When a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible.
Complexitysame
LowLowLowLow
Timedifferent
30–45 min45–75 min45-90 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
1-10Team members involved3-103-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement ActionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsEmotion Board, Themes, Action Items
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
RetrospectiveTeamReflection
Add more methods