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 |  Agile Sailboat Retrospective |  Growth A/B Testing |  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 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 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 | Starfish Board, Practice Changes, Experiments | Sailboat Board, Risks, Improvement Actions | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions |
Tagsno overlap | RetrospectiveImprovementExperimentsTeam | RetrospectiveTeamImprovement | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam |