View source for Shape-Up Super Short for Small Organizations: For two or three small teams working on interrelated topics"

{| class="wikitable" style="width:100%;"
! Step
! Purpose / Intended Outcome
! Step Activities
! Facilitator Notes
! Timebox

|-
| '''1. Welcome & Context Framing'''
| Establish that teams worked on distinct but interrelated scopes. Create shared purpose for cross-team reflection.
| 
* Welcome group.
* Acknowledge the team structure: different scopes, shared ecosystem (e.g., infrastructure + UI, or backend + operations).
* State purpose: understand how our bets influenced each other and what we can improve as an interconnected system.
| 
Clarify this is a joint retro—not to compare performance, but to improve system-level flow.  
Optionally mention shared risks (e.g., misaligned shaping, inter-team dependencies).
| 5 min

|-
| '''2. Team Breakouts: Built / Shipped / Learned + Hot Takes'''
| Allow each team to reflect on their own cycle with local context.
| 
* Break into two teams.
* Each team fills out:
** 2–3 notes for '''Built''', '''Shipped''', '''Learned'''
** 1–2 short '''Hot Takes''' (provocative insights)
* Each team identifies 1 internal success and 1 blocker to share later.
| 
Prompt teams to name not just what they built or shipped, but how their work interacted with the other team’s timeline or assumptions.  
Use different color stickies or digital tags if useful.
| 10 min

|-
| '''3. Cross-Team Exchange: Successes, Friction, and Hot Takes'''
| Make interdependencies and misalignments visible.
| 
* Each team shares:
** 1 highlight  
** 1 blocker  
** 1 Hot Take  
* Other team listens only.
| 
Encourage specificity when sharing blockers: “We waited for X”, “Y’s interface was unclear.”  
Facilitator captures inter-team issues on shared board (e.g., missed timing, unclear shaping boundary, late changes).
| 10 min

|-
| '''4. Synthesis: Cross-Team Patterns and Disconnects'''
| Identify where things broke down (or worked well) across the seam between teams.
| 
* Discuss:
** “Where did expectations not align?”
** “Where was shaping ambiguous between teams?”
** “Did one bet assume too much about the other?”
* Surface system-level lessons.
| 
Frame discussion around Shape Up concepts: bet boundaries, interface points, shaping clarity, and appetite realism.  
Encourage owning **shared misalignment**, not blaming.
| 10 min

|-
| '''5. Joint Action Planning'''
| Define 1–2 changes that will improve inter-team flow and shaping.
| 
* Ask: “What change would help both teams operate more cleanly in parallel next cycle?”
* Co-brainstorm 3–4 candidate changes.
* Dot vote or discuss to choose 1–2.
* Assign owner(s) or action steward(s).
| 
Steer toward improvements that reduce ambiguity or friction between teams: e.g., a shared shaping preview checkpoint, clearer API contract expectations, or staggered hill chart syncs.
| 7 min

|-
| '''6. Close & Sentiment Check'''
| End on alignment and forward momentum.
| 
* Recap:
** Inter-team learning  
** Key agreement  
** Action(s) and owner(s)
* Invite one-word sentiment or quick takeaway from each person.
| 
Optionally mention how and when actions will be followed up.  
Affirm shared ownership of improving inter-team collaboration.
| 3 min

|}

'''🔥 What are “Shape Up Hot Takes”?'''

''Definition:''  
Shape Up Hot Takes are short, blunt reflections that challenge assumptions or provoke insight—especially useful in complex, interdependent work.

''Examples:''  
* “This pitch assumed coordination we didn’t plan for.”  
* “The other team scoped for speed, we scoped for safety.”  
* “Our ‘handoff’ was really just a hope.”  
* “We needed one shared boundary, not two separate bets.”