Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 00987bd93b171c1ae3e5b566761fd3f1d30237e54fcc4397837c153377320bac

# Online Retrospective Board

Team members silently write observations into columns, vote on items needing attention, and agree on concrete action items for their next working cycle.

**Time:** 45 minutes. UWT standard facilitation timing; promotional source files do not prescribe a run duration.
**People:** 4 to 16. Individual silent input followed by whole-group prioritization and discussion.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Turn recent team work experiences into specific, assigned process adjustments.
**Use it when:** At the end of a sprint, milestone, or delivery cycle when a team needs to review workflow and agree on changes.
**Skip it when:** When team members are in active crisis requiring immediate conflict mediation or when there has been no shared cycle of work to reflect upon.

## Materials and tools

- A shared digital board or physical whiteboard with three columns: What Went Well, What Needs Improvement, and Action Ideas
- Digital cards or sticky notes (5 to 10 per person)
- Timer

## Before participants arrive

1. Create the shared three-column board before the session.
2. Configure anonymous or signed card submission depending on team safety preferences.
3. Test participant access to the board link.

## Say this to open

Welcome to our retrospective. Today we review our recent work cycle. We will silently post what worked, what caused friction, and practical ideas. Then we will vote on what matters most and assign concrete next steps. You choose what to write, and you may pass during verbal review.

## How to run it

### 1. Set focus and silent generation (8 minutes)

State the scope of the reflection. Give the opening script. Direct everyone to post cards silently into column 1 (What Went Well) and column 2 (What Needs Improvement). Limit participants to 3 to 5 cards per column. Do not discuss items yet.

### 2. Group and clarify cards (10 minutes)

Read through cards column by column. Merge duplicates with group consent. Allow card authors to clarify brief phrases in under 30 seconds if ambiguous. Do not debate solutions during this step.

### 3. Dot voting (5 minutes)

Give each participant 3 votes. Instruct everyone to place votes on cards in the Needs Improvement column that most need collective action. Silent voting ends when the timer sounds.

### 4. Develop action items (15 minutes)

Take the top two or three vote-getting issues. For each issue, solicit concrete proposals. Move accepted proposals into the Action Ideas column. Each accepted item must have an assigned owner and an agreed completion date.

### 5. Wrap and confirm ownership (7 minutes)

Review the recorded action items out loud. Ask owners to confirm their task. Run the debrief questions with responses limited to 2 or 3 volunteers.


## Debrief questions

- Which agreed action item will produce the clearest operational change during the next cycle?
- Did our board capture the primary work friction, or did we avoid a harder topic?

**Finished output:** A finalized board containing 1 to 3 owned, scheduled action items recorded in the team task tracker.

## Remote

Run via shared digital board software. Participants work on video/audio while manipulating cards directly. Read-only view is supported by having the facilitator share their screen for any participant unable to open the tool.

## Hybrid

In-room attendees use individual laptops to interact with the common digital board, or an in-room proxy scribe inputs physical cards directly into the digital workspace in real time.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may submit cards anonymously if the platform supports it.
- Speaking during discussion is optional; participants may submit comments and votes solely in writing.

## If the session gets stuck

**One person dominates discussion of a single card.**

Enforce a two-minute timer per topic. Move unresolved debates to a dedicated parking-lot follow-up.

**Action items are vague aspirations rather than real tasks.**

Ask: 'What physical artifact or calendar change will show this is done next Friday?' Do not accept the card until an owner and test are named.


## Terms used here

- Dot voting: A quick prioritization method where each person receives a limited number of votes to distribute across items.
- Sprint: A fixed period of time during which specific work is completed and prepared for review.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in product documentation from EasyRetro and Miro agile retrospective templates, derived from standard agile retrospective practices.

Evidence consisted entirely of promotional and marketing copy from online board vendors (EasyRetro, Miro). UWT extracted the core agile retrospective column-board mechanic, removed marketing claims, and supplied a concrete 45-minute facilitator procedure with step timing, dot voting rules, and action item criteria.

[EasyRetro](https://easyretro.io/use-cases/online-retrospective-tool)

[Miro](https://miro.com/agile/retrospective/)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/online-retrospective-tool/