Method guide · Work with a structured grid
Agile Health Check
Describe good and poor collaboration states in observable actions, compare experiences, and select one improvement to try.
- People
- 3–15
- Base procedure time
- 90 minutes
- Recording
- Shared record
Purpose: Reflect and learn; Build working relationships.
English guide
Text acceptance is not approval of this rendered page, its media, or publication.
How this method works
A retrospective for making collaboration principles visible through their endpoints. Rather than deciding health through one score, describe good and poor states in the team's own words for each principle and have each person mark the present. The median is only a starting point for conversation, and outlying points are also material for hearing reasons. Finally choose one point to improve and an action to try. Use the scale to align how the team wants to work individually and together, not as a comparative rating. Do not use it where assessments inform personnel decisions or minority views cannot be handled safely.
Phase schedule
Minutes are cumulative from the start of the base plan, not a live timer. Read scaling for any additional time. Phase controls do not advance automatically.
Use the arrow keys, Home or End while these controls have focus. The complete phase schedule remains below, including without JavaScript.
- Choose principles0–15 minutes from the start (15 minutes)
Action: Choose. Participation: Everyone.
Recording not separately specified for this phase
- Draw the endpoints15–35 minutes from the start (20 minutes)
Action: Draw. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
- Place the present35–50 minutes from the start (15 minutes)
Action: Place. Participation: Individually.
Individual record
- Discuss differences50–75 minutes from the start (25 minutes)
Action: Discuss. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
- Decide an improvement75–90 minutes from the start (15 minutes)
Action: Decide. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
Facilitation steps
- For 15 minutes, choose 3–6 collaboration principles relevant to this period and confirm that scoring is only for improvement.
- For 20 minutes, write the best- and worst-working states for each principle as visible actions at the scale endpoints.
- For 15 minutes, each person independently marks where they think the team is now, adding a short reason if needed.
- For 25 minutes, read the median and distant points in turn, check different experiences and assumptions, and retain issues one by one.
- For 15 minutes, choose one principle with the most apparent improvement potential and decide an action to try over the next 2 weeks and how to check it.
If something changes
If
More than 7 principles are displayed on the scales.
Then
Together select up to 6 most relevant to this period's outcomes and move the others to candidates for next time.
If
Endpoint descriptions consist only of personality or attitudes.
Then
Rewrite them as actions observable in meetings, handovers, or decisions.
If
Questions about an outlying point become demands for justification.
Then
Ask each person about a specific situation in which they saw that state, rather than why they gave the score.
Preparation
Materials
- One whole-group scale sheet with 1–10 scales for 3–6 principles
- Dot stickers or online voting, one vote per person per principle
- Two improvement-action notes per person
- One writing implement per person
Room and setup
- One wall or screen where everyone can see the same scales
- One semicircular area for discussing differences in front of the scales
Adjust for people and time
With 3–8, gather around one scale sheet; with 9–15, use the same scale and conduct only individual voting simultaneously. Use at most 6 principles, one vote per person per principle, and two improvement notes per person. Above 10 people, limit discussion of differences to 3 minutes per principle and select only one whole-group improvement. Online, use shared-board scales and optionally read reasons for points anonymously first after voting.
Safety and non-applicable situations
Use scores only for improvement, not personnel decisions or comparative ratings. Do not use the method where minority views cannot be handled safely; do not demand that outliers justify scores. Describe observable situations, not personality, and keep the median as a conversation entry rather than a verdict.
Historical translation and source notes
These original notes are retained verbatim with their fixed source versions. This historical label does not resolve a source-specific concern or establish current acceptance.
- The procedure and scaling cap principles at 6, but the branch triggers only above 7. It gives no branch for exactly 7; both the cap and strict threshold are preserved.
Manuscript's recorded references
These translate the original manuscript's source and rights claims. They remain separate from any current-page notice below; they do not establish new verification.
- Agile Health Check — Open Practice Library
https://openpracticelibrary.com/practice/agile-health-check/
Adaptation under CC-BY-4.0; changes made
- Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CC-BY-4.0
Current-page licence notice
A Taiwa no Fumen adaptation based on the Open Practice Library practice identified below. The manuscript's recorded references and the source page checked for this notice are shown separately.
Changes: explanations, timings, instructions, materials and branches were edited for this site. The English edition translates that Japanese manuscript; it is not a verbatim translation of the original practice.
The checked source footer names CC BY 4.0 but links to CC BY-SA 4.0. The official site source code contains the same mismatch. This has not been confirmed with the rights holders. This notice does not change the terms of the original material.
This site's contributions to the identified adaptation and English translation are shared under CC BY-SA 4.0. Credit the creators, identify the source and licence, indicate changes, and share adaptations under the same terms. This does not remove separate source terms or third-party rights.
This is not a blanket licence for the whole site, other original manuscripts, third-party photographs, logos, external templates or trademarks. The source's Except where noted qualification remains applicable.
Names are used descriptively to identify the source. No endorsement or approval by Open Practice Library or its contributors is implied.
See the linked legal code for its no-warranty and other provisions.
The additional contributor names are handles from the fixed official practice source. They are not inferred real names or a reconstruction of collapsed editor labels. The earlier attribution limits remain recorded.
Credits on the checked source page
- Named contributors on the source page: Nick Woods
- Contributors listed in the official practice source (repository handles): @nick-woods
Source page checked on 2026-10-17: Agile Health Check.
Source lineage
CC BY-SA 4.0 — this site's adaptation and translation contributions · Legal code · Official source policy
This material-specific notice does not itself establish publication clearance. Preserved manuscript references above remain separate from the current page's credits and licence evidence.
Diagram, print, and video language
Original Japanese guide, diagram, and print view. Their labels and print text have not been translated; an English print edition is not provided here.
English video-library navigation. Original Japanese audio, subtitles and transcripts remain labelled Japanese resources. Their translations are separate later work. No remote player is embedded here.
The manual English phase controls are a navigation aid, not a live facilitation timer. Interactive diagram motion remains pending.
Editorial provenance
Japanese source status and logs are provenance only. They do not mean this English text or interface was field-tested. Historical fixed-text acceptance and hold records remain specific to their recorded versions; displaying them neither asserts current acceptance nor resolves source-specific restrictions.
Original source log (Japanese)
2026-07-24 · Recorded participant count: 1
2026-07-24の受入宣言に基づく一括記録(15手法)。個別セッションの実測値ではない。