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 |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Agile 4Ls 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 decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 45–75 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-10 | 3-10 | Team members involved |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions |
Tags1 shared | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | AutonomyRolesTeam | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam |