Sept. 5, 2018

How we facilitated an all-hands retrospective for 60 people in three hours

Imagine a retrospective that is attended by multiple teams, such as those of an entire program, or even organization. What would it look like?

This blog post was a co-authored by Anita Siebold,  Pam Clavier and Lukas Klose. It is a short version that outlines the facilitation of a retrospective for 60 or more people. You can download the corresponding ‘how to’ guide, which includes a more detailed step-by-step guide, a planning checklist, and a closer look at lessons learned.

Setting the scene

Picture six eager DevOps pods, four enthused technical teams, five servant leader program team members, one Agile Coach, three intense hours and lots of coffee. This perfectly describes what our all-teams retrospective looked like.

PeopleAll-team retrospectives (retrospectives that are attended by multiple teams, such as those of an entire program, or even organization) can be an important opportunity to inspect and reflect on how teams work together as a team of teams. It is also a chance to practice empiricism at a program level: be transparent, inspect, and adapt. We believe that mirroring scrum ceremonies at the program level can serve as an important success factor for organizational agility.

With only three hours and a room of about 60 very talkative and eager participants, we needed to be organized, focused and engaging. Here is how we did it:

Begin with the end in mind - know your purpose

We wanted to walk away from the three hour meeting with the following:

  • Three problem statements, with one or more proposed solutions (including acceptance criteria)
  • A focus group (+/- 5 people and a steward) for each problem statement
The focus groups should take each of the proposed solutions, converge them into a single approach and move that approach forward until the next all-hands retro.

Breaking down the retrospective into phases

We wanted to align our facilitation with the diamond of participatory decision making: diverge, discuss, converge. With so many participants, clearly we needed to do breakout groups, of which each would diverge/discuss/converge. We planned to use multiple and recursive diamonds (see illustration).

All Hands Retro Phases

Phase I: Setting the stage

We started out with announcing the focus of the conversation (in our case: ”how can we get to ‘shippable’ every two weeks?”), followed by an introduction of the agenda and a crash course about using the diamond of participatory decision making. The crash course was to encourage and enhance inclusive conversations in break-out groups.

Phase II: Brainstorming and shortlisting problem statements

Then we asked the participants to do the following:

  1. Individually brainstorm a list of issues
  2. In groups of nine, consolidate, prioritize, and articulate a single problem statement
  3. Take turns in presenting the problem statement to everyone in the room
  4. As a whole group, shortlist and consolidate on a maximum of three topics

Phase III: Root cause analysis and solutions

After phase II, we asked the participants to gather around the shortlisted problem statements and self-organize into groups of five. The newly formed groups are asked to do the following:

  1. Select one of the three problem statements
  2. Create a poster for the chosen problem statement and provide...
  • a root cause analysis
  • a proposed solution
  • acceptance criteria
Once again, groups were asked to present their posters and feedback was provided by either
  • writing the feedback down on a sticky and attach to poster, or
  • putting a smiley sticker on the poster

Phase IV: Consolidate proposed solutions and drive implementation

At this stage, we called for a steward and a group of volunteers to take on one of the three topics. The purpose was to take this offline (in the weeks between retros), and follow up by

  • Consolidating the proposed solutions into a single way forward
  • Driving the adoption and implementation of the solution

Top 4 Learnings to take to your own retrospectives

Three months after the retro we had mostly good feedback, concrete actions taken and… lots of lessons learned. Here are some recommendations:

Rethinking Bubble#1) Be very clear about the topic - When we presented the question to frame the conversation, not everyone was on the same page about what “shippable” meant. We cut the discussion about this short to stay on schedule, but this possibly affected the engagement and maturity of the subsequent conversations. Our take-away was that the focus of the conversation needs to be crystal clear. If it is even slightly ambiguous, it can become a big time-back-hole.

#2) Test your PA system ahead of time - The venue did provide us with a PA system, but we did not test it ahead of time. Once the meeting started we could not use it because the volume button was well hidden in a closet. Now as facilitators we could project our voices, so we initially thought - not a big deal, but when participants started to share their views it was sometimes very difficult to hear them. At the end we found the volume button, but it costed us some time.

#3) Define acceptance criteria early on - Acceptance criteria can be a powerful technique to avoid misunderstandings and ambiguity. We found that defining the acceptance criteria earlier than later could really improve the applicability of the proposed solutions.


#4) Provide support after the retro - Provide visibility and product ownership and Scrum Master support to focus groups in the weeks after the retrospective.


This blog article is a short version that outlines the facilitation of a retrospective for 60 or more people. The corresponding ‘how to’ guide includes a more detailed step-by-step guide, a planning checklist, and a closer look at lessons learned. Download here >> Link

Image of lklose

Lukas Klose

blog comments powered by Disqus
Image of lklose

Lukas Klose

Latest Posts

Leading and Lagging Indicators: What is the right way to measure performance?

How can you measure and track your performance using leading and lagging indicators? 

Image of hwong

Hazel Wong

Marketing Assistant at agile42. Passionate about gaining insights from data in order to create content that resonates with the audience. Eager to help teams and companies open their mindset about the application of agile methods to address their challenges.

Changing organizational culture at Siemens Digital Factory

Siemens DF extended the use of agile methods the right way, through a thorough adoption of the essence and practice of being Agile

Image of kpogorzala

Konrad Pogorzala

Presenting at the Regional Scrum Gathering South Africa 2018

agile42 present at the Regional Scrum Gathering to be held in Durban, South Africa, 8-9 November 2018

Image of joperold

Joanne Perold

Agile Coach in South Africa. Explorer, learner, experiencer, part time philosopher, working with teams and organisations to be more agile.

Scrumtisch December 2018

The Berlin Scrum User Group meets on December 13th at agile42, Gruenberger Str. 54, 10245 Berlin.

Image of aballer

Alexandra Baller

agile42 Team Assistant

Motivation to Get Better

When Turkish real estate site Zingat realized that their Scrum adoption suffered from anti-patterns, they decided it was time to improve

Image of ayse.turunc

Ayşe Turunç

As an Agile coach, I strongly believe in people talent, in collective intelligence and that happy teams are more efficient. I'm looking forward to put my talent to help teams and individuals to work better together and grow.
Image of ebru4984

Ebru Yalçınkaya

I act as a change agent where the teams, domains need to enhance agility to reach their goals, to create a shared vision if needed. I coach every kind of team , every domain, like management teams or like customer care, technology and sales groups.