Use this format when
- The team wants a familiar low-explanation format.
- A sprint included both wins and improvement opportunities.
- New participants need an accessible first retrospective.
Retrospective templates Updated
Classic Sprintretrospective template
The Classic Sprint format is a dependable default for teams that want balanced evidence without learning a metaphor. It pairs improvement discussion with strengths and appreciation so the meeting does not become a defect inventory.
- Duration
- 30–40 minutes
- Team size
- 3–12 people
- Best for
- Routine sprint reviews, newer teams, and a clear balanced default
What each column means
Use the prompts to keep cards specific. The examples show the level of detail that makes discussion and voting useful.
Went Well
3Which outcomes, decisions, or practices helped this sprint succeed?
- Early API testing exposed an integration gap.
- The smaller stories made progress visible.
- The release owner kept stakeholders aligned.
To Improve
3Where did the team lose time, quality, clarity, or confidence?
- Refinement missed an important dependency.
- Reviews waited too long near sprint end.
- The test environment differed from production.
Shout Outs
3Who helped the team, and what useful behavior should be repeated?
- Mina paired through the rollback plan.
- Support summarized customer reports clearly.
- Lee challenged an assumption before implementation.
30–40 minutes agenda
A complete path from framing the room to assigning one concrete follow-up.
- 013 minutes
Frame the review
Name the sprint or project being reviewed, restate the purpose of each column, and remind everyone to describe observable events.
- 027 minutes
Write observations silently
Give everyone uninterrupted time to add one specific observation per card across every column.
- 037 minutes
Share and clarify
Read the cards column by column and let authors add context without debating solutions yet.
- 045 minutes
Group and vote
Combine cards that describe the same pattern, then vote for the themes that would most improve the next iteration.
- 0510 minutes
Discuss the leading themes
Explore causes, consequences, and tradeoffs behind the highest-voted themes while making space for dissenting evidence.
- 065 minutes
Commit to one change
Turn the strongest insight into a small action with an owner, deadline, and signal the team can review next time.
Choose another format when
- The same format has become automatic and repetitive.
- The team needs a deeper risk or emotional-health discussion.
- A complex release needs more forward-looking prompts.
Facilitation tips
- Request evidence rather than broad labels.
- Discuss why Went Well items worked so they can be protected.
- Keep Shout Outs specific to helpful behavior.
- Group improvement cards before voting.
- Carry the chosen action into the next sprint review.
Useful variations
Async classic retro
Collect cards before the meeting and reserve live time for clarification, voting, and actions.
New-team edition
Add a short working-agreement check before the three standard columns.
Release edition
Review the entire release window and include collaborators outside the delivery squad.
Before the retro
Recommended warm-up
Frequently asked questions
What are the columns in a classic sprint retrospective?
This version uses Went Well, To Improve, and Shout Outs to balance strengths, friction, and recognition.
Is the classic format good for a first retrospective?
Yes. The prompts are easy to explain, require no metaphor, and give new teams a balanced conversation structure.
How do you avoid a repetitive classic retro?
Change the scope, ask for evidence, review the previous action first, and occasionally switch to a more specialized format.
What should happen after voting?
Discuss the highest-impact theme and create one small, owned improvement with a date or signal for review.
Run this Classic Sprint Retrospective
Open the ready-made columns, invite the team, collect observations, vote, and leave with an owned improvement.