What Went Well Retrospective Template
The classic three-column retro — Went Well, To Improve, Action Items. The default format for sprint reviews in agile and scrum teams. Run it live in your browser, share a link, export the result to Markdown.
The template
Three columns, three questions, one outcome: a short list of changes the team commits to before the next sprint. Cards stay private during writing, the board reveals everything at once, and the action items get a named owner.
Went Well
What worked this sprint and is worth keeping?
To Improve
What slowed us down, broke, or felt heavier than it should?
Action Items
Owned next steps with a name and a date.
Where the format came from
The three-column retrospective traces back to Norman Kerth's Project Retrospectives (2001) and the Agile Manifesto's twelfth principle: "At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly."
Early Scrum and XP teams popularised the streamlined "What went well? What didn't? What will we do differently?" version because it fit on a whiteboard in 30 minutes. The third question gradually became its own explicit Action Items column — making the commitment to change part of the artifact, not just the discussion. Today it's the most common retro format in industry surveys and the built-in default in most agile tooling.
When to use it (and when to pick something else)
Pick the What Went Well template when:
- You're running a routine end-of-sprint retro on a 1–4 week cadence.
- The team is new to retros and needs a low-friction starting point.
- You have 45–60 minutes and want concrete actions by the end.
- You want a format that stakeholders, new hires, and managers all read at a glance.
| Situation | Better choice | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Sprint was rough; team needs to vent first | Mad / Sad / Glad | Names feelings explicitly. "Went well" tends to flatten what's underneath. |
| Quarter or large initiative wrap-up | Sailboat (Wind / Anchor / Rocks / Island) | Forward-looking; captures goals, risks, and blockers, not just wins. |
| Onboarding or learning-focused team | 4Ls — Loved, Learned, Lacked, Longed For | Surfaces learning and unmet wants alongside outcomes. |
| Flow-based team, no sprint to look back on | Kanban retrospective | Frames the conversation around flow data instead of a fixed iteration. |
| Need to decide what to stop doing | Start / Stop / Continue | Forces an explicit "stop" column the team has to populate. |
How to run a What Went Well retrospective
- Setup (5 min). Pick the Went Well template, name the board after the sprint (e.g. Sprint 47 — auth migration), and share the link in chat. Anyone joins without an account.
- Silent writing (10 min). Everyone drops cards in Went Well and To Improve. Cards stay masked from other participants so people commit to honest answers instead of socially safe ones.
- Reveal and group (10 min). Flip the cards. Drag related ones together — a pattern usually shows up fast (one repeating frustration often explains most of the "to improve" pile).
- Vote (5 min). Each person gets three dots. Spend them on the items worth discussing. The board re-sorts by votes.
- Discuss and capture actions (15–20 min). Walk through the top items. For each one, write an Action card with an owner and a date. Skip the vague stuff ("communicate better") in favour of things you'll know are done by next week.
- Export. One click drops the board into Markdown so the actions land in your wiki or ticket tracker instead of evaporating.
Example: a filled-in board
Here's what a healthy What Went Well retro looks like after the discussion. Wins are specific (not "good teamwork"), pain points name a concrete event, and actions have owners.
Went Well
×4 votes
To Improve
×5 votes on the top item
Action Items
Owners attached, due before next planning
Prompts that get better answers
"What went well?" tends to produce generic praise. Sharpen the prompt and the cards get sharper too.
- Went Well: What is one thing you'd want the team to do exactly the same next sprint?
- Went Well: Which decision from this sprint paid off? Why?
- To Improve: Where did you lose the most time, and what caused it?
- To Improve: What slowed someone else down because of how we work?
- Action Items: Pick the one change that, if it works, would make next sprint visibly better.
Tip: Pick one Action Item, not five. Teams that ship one change per sprint and watch the result tend to improve faster than teams that commit to a long list and forget half of it by Wednesday.
Common variants
- 4 columns: add a Shout-outs or Kudos column at the start. Cheap to add, gives quieter teammates a place to credit specific people by name.
- 3 columns, different framing: "What went well? / What didn't? / What will we change?" — same shape, slightly different cognitive frame, useful for teams that resist the word "improve".
- Went well only: for celebration-focused retros after a launch or a tough quarter. Skip the To Improve column entirely and replace Action Items with What we're proud of.
FAQ
What is the What Went Well retrospective?
A three-column retro with the columns Went Well, To Improve, and Action Items. The team reflects on the last iteration, captures wins and pain points, and commits to specific actions for the next sprint.
How long should it take?
45–60 minutes for most teams: 5 min setup, 10 min silent writing, 10 min grouping, 5 min voting, 15–20 min discussion and action capture. Add 10–15 minutes for teams larger than eight.
How many action items should we commit to?
One or two, with a named owner each. Long action lists are a reliable predictor that nothing on them will get done.
Can I customise the columns?
Yes. Rename them, add a Shout-outs column, or drop Action Items if you're running a celebration retro. The template is a starting point, not a rule.
Is the template free?
Yes. Retro Harbour is free with no sign-up. Open the Went Well template, share the board link, and you're running.