View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Sailboat Retrospective |  Agile Starfish Retrospective |  Growth A/B Testing |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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 two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | 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 | Low | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 1-4 Wochen | 45–75 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 4-12 | 1-6 | Team members involved |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Sailboat Board, Risks, Improvement Actions | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions |
Tagsno overlap | RetrospectiveTeamImprovement | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam |