Retrospective Protocol
Use this format after each meaningful implementation cycle. Keep it concise, evidence-based, and action-oriented.
Required Sections
- What Worked
- Concrete behaviors or decisions that improved outcomes.
- Include evidence: CI run IDs, validator results, timings, or commit references.
- What Did Not Work
- Concrete issues, failures, or friction points.
- Include impact and trigger conditions.
- What Went Well
- Positive execution patterns worth repeating.
- Distinct from “what worked” by focusing on team/process quality.
- What Could Be Better
- Gaps where outcomes were acceptable but not optimal.
- Include why improvement matters.
- Process Improvements
- List only actionable items.
- Each item must include:
- owner
- expected outcome
- due checkpoint (date or next milestone)
- validation method
- Follow-up Review (next retrospective)
- For each prior improvement item, mark:
- status: upheld, improved, maintained, regressed, or dropped
- evidence
- adjustment (if needed)
- For each prior improvement item, mark:
Retrospective Template
## Retrospective (YYYY-MM-DD)
### Context
- Scope:
- Time window:
- Relevant commits:
- CI runs:
### What Worked
- [ ] item + evidence
### What Did Not Work
- [ ] item + impact + trigger
### What Went Well
- [ ] item
### What Could Be Better
- [ ] item + why
### Process Improvements
1. Improvement:
- Owner:
- Expected outcome:
- Due checkpoint:
- Validation method:
### Prior Improvement Follow-up
1. Improvement:
- Status:
- Evidence:
- Adjustment:
Quality Bar
- Do not include generic statements without evidence.
- Keep process improvements small and testable.
- Keep retrospective updates in the same commit series as behavior/policy changes when possible.