View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 45–75 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 4-12 | Team members involved |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam |