This post presents three more sprint retrospective techniques to add to the six I have already detailed in my previous posts Sprint Retrospective Techniques 1 and Sprint Retrospectives 2. Why present three more techniques? Surely six is enough to drive continuous improvement in any team? First of all I have found these techniques to be useful additions to my arsenal for reasons I outline below. Secondly variation is one of the keys to maintaining the effectiveness of a team’s retrospectives and more techniques makes for more variety.
Technique 1 – 4Ls
The 4Ls is shorthand for the following:
- What was Liked? What were the things that the team really appreciated about the sprint?
- What was Learned? What were things that the team learned that they did not know before the sprint?
- What Lacked? What were the things that the team think could have done better in the sprint?
- What was Longed For? What were the things the team desired or wished for but were not present during the sprint?
A 4Ls retrospective can be run by following these steps:
- Create a poster for each of the Ls and stick them up on the wall (easel paper is good for this purpose but drawing sections on a whiteboard is a good alternative).
- Explain the meaning of each of the Ls to the team.
- Hand out sticky notes and markers to the team.
- Encourage the team to place stickies with ideas onto each relevant poster and wait until everyone has posted all of their ideas.
- Have the team group similar ideas together on each poster.
- Discuss each grouping as a team and note any corrective actions.
The reason I like using the 4Ls is that it has the potential to cover a wide range of topics in a compact session. It addresses both the positive and negative aspects of the sprint (Liked and Lacked) but also specifically calls out the teams growing experience (Learned) and problematic gaps that can filled (Longed For).
Technique 2 – Satisfaction Histograms
There are many variations of the Satisfaction Histogram. I came across the version outlined here when a team member on a project I was a Scrum Master on offered to run a couple of retrospective sessions. This is how he ran one of the sessions and it turned out to be very effective.
- As preparation pick around four topics that you want to gauge the teams satisfaction of. These can be practices, behaviors or anything else you can think of.
- For example: Testing practices, Keeping a clean build, Standup effectiveness, Accuracy of estimates, etc.
- Draw a satisfaction histogram for each of the topics on a whiteboard. Label the x-axis 1-5 for each and add the topic name as a heading.
- Explain the meaning behind each of the topics to the team.
- Explain the meanings of the 1-5 scale to the team. For example, for “Our Team Communication is…”
- 1 - “…disastrous, is actively impeding the team”
- 2 - “…bad, not being done effectively”
- 3 - “…satisfactory, requires improvement”
- 4 - “…mostly very good, could still be improved further in small ways”
- 5 - “…awesome, little or no room for improvement”
- Distribute sticky notes to the team, one per topic.
- Invite the team to place one sticky note in each topic’s histogram to grade how satisfied they are with the team’s performance for that topic. Sticky notes placed on the same topic and number are stacked.
- Wait until everyone has placed their stickies.
- Discuss the results for each topic in turn. Where there is low satisfaction or a wide-spread of satisfaction grades dig into why this is.
- As potential corrective actions are identified by the team, especially for topics with mostly low numbers, note them down.
This version of Satisfaction Histogram has a number of advantages. First of all the selection of topics means that it can be targeted to certain problem areas. Note that the technique can also be varied to allow the team to suggest topics. This can be done by leaving one histogram blank for the team to suggest the topic during the session. As the team becomes more familiar with the technique you can allow them to suggest all of the topics to be scored for satisfaction.
Secondly it is very visual. At a glance everyone can see the topics where the team is satisfied, dissatisfied or in disagreement. This allows the team to focus on the topics where they belive they are most lacking or conflicted about.
Technique 3 – Circles
Circles is more commonly known as Circles and Soup. I dislike the ”Soup” metaphor so I refer to the technique simply as Circles. In addition when I run this technique I replace “Soup” with “Concern”. I understand that the technique is based on Stephen Covey’s book Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.
The idea behind circles is to get the team to focus their energies on what they can change and not to waste time worrying about what they cannot affect.
A Circles retrospective can be run by following these steps:
- Define what an impediment is to the team:
- “An impediment is anything that prevents you or the team from delivering work as efficiently as possible. An impediment is anything that blocks you working or slows you down.”
- Distribute sticky notes and markers to the team.
- Ask the team to write down all of the impediments encountered in the sprint, one per sticky note, and have them post them onto a whiteboard.
- Wait until everyone has posted all of their impediment ideas.
- Ask the team to identify and remove any duplicate impediment stickies.
- Draw three concentric circles on the whiteboard and label them, from the inside out, “Control”, “Influence” and “Concern”.
- Define what each of the circles means to the team:
- Control - Impediments for which the team can take action to remediate.
- Influence - Impediments for which the team can collaborate with or make a recommendation to an outside entity to remediate. For example, another team, group or line management.
- Concern - Impediments over which the team has no ability to Control or Influence.
- Invite the team to collaboratively place each of the impediments in the appropriate circle.
- Encourage and guide any debate as to what should go where.
- Wait until all of the impediments have been placed in one of the circles.
- Go through each Control impediment one at a time and have the team:
- Gain an understanding of what each impediment is.
- Identify remedial actions that are within the team’s control and write these on the whiteboard.
- Go through each Influence impediment one at a time and have the team:
- Gain an understanding of what each impediment is.
- Identify contacts and recommendations to influence their remediation and write these on the whiteboard.
- Review the Concern impediments to gain an understanding of what they are.
- Note that as the impediments are discussed the team may identify actions that had not previously occurred to them. This can cause the impediments to move inward. For example an impediment that was initially placed in Concern may move to Influence or Control.
Circles is my new favourite technique but I use it sparingly. The reason I try not to overuse it is because it focuses very much on impediments and does not have the “celebration of success” aspect that is built into most other retrospective techniques. However, it is a powerful technique for sprint retrospectives as well as for other purposes. It is, for example, ideally suited to holding retrospectives into releases especially those that proved to be problematic.