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 Starfish Retrospective |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |  Agile Sprint Retrospective |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 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 | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 45–75 min | Up to 3 hours for a one-month Sprint; shorter Sprints are usually shorter |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-10 | Team members involved | Scrum Team |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Improvement actions, Team agreements |
Tagsno overlap | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | RetrospectiveImprovementLearning |