The Good - The Bad - The Ugly
Make space for uncomfortable truths alongside wins—facilitate with safety rules.
The good
Successes, strengths, and bright spots.
The bad
Problems that were manageable but costly.
The ugly
Hard issues: near misses, conflict, ethics, or systemic failures.
This board is for demo purposes only. Your responses are not saved. Close or refresh the page to clear all cards. Do not add any sensitive information.
What is The Good - The Bad - The Ugly?
The Good - The Bad - The Ugly retrospective borrows its name from Sergio Leone's classic 1966 Western film, and the cinematic reference is deliberate. Just as the film explores moral complexity through three distinct character archetypes, this retrospective format creates space for the full spectrum of team experience—from triumphant wins to uncomfortable truths that teams often avoid discussing.
The three columns represent escalating levels of difficulty. "The Good" captures successes, strengths, and positive outcomes. "The Bad" addresses manageable problems—things that went wrong but were recoverable or had limited impact. "The Ugly" is the differentiator: it creates explicit space for the hard issues that teams typically suppress—near misses, interpersonal conflicts, ethical concerns, systemic failures, or problems so deeply embedded that nobody wants to be the one to name them.
This format acknowledges a truth about team dynamics that many retrospective formats ignore: some issues are too uncomfortable to surface in standard "what went well / what to improve" discussions. By explicitly creating "The Ugly" column, the facilitator signals that these conversations are not only permitted but expected. This normalization of difficult discourse is what makes the format uniquely valuable for mature teams.
When to use The Good - The Bad - The Ugly
Use this format when you sense the team is avoiding important conversations. Signs include recurring problems that are acknowledged privately but never discussed in retros, or a pattern of polite but superficial feedback that does not lead to real change. The Ugly column breaks through politeness barriers and creates space for radical honesty.
This format works best with teams of four to eight people who have established psychological safety. It requires a facilitator with strong conflict management skills because the Ugly column can surface genuinely sensitive material. Plan for a 60 to 75 minute session to allow adequate time for the difficult discussions that the Ugly column generates. It is most effective when used periodically—perhaps quarterly—rather than as a regular sprint retro format.
Avoid this format with newly formed teams or in environments with low trust. The Ugly column requires vulnerability, and vulnerability without safety leads to harm. Also avoid it when there is no capacity to act on what surfaces—raising ugly truths without follow-through erodes trust more than not raising them at all.
How to facilitate The Good - The Bad - The Ugly
Facilitation of this format requires more deliberate safety-setting than any other. Begin with explicit ground rules: "What is shared in The Ugly stays in this room unless we collectively decide to escalate. We discuss situations and systems, not individuals. Everyone has the right to pass." Consider using a talking object (physical or virtual) during the Ugly discussion to ensure structured turn-taking.
Give the team seven to ten minutes for silent writing. For the Ugly column, consider offering the option of anonymous submission—place cards face-down and have the facilitator read them aloud. Process The Good first (five minutes), then The Bad (ten minutes), then The Ugly (twenty minutes or more). The time allocation reflects where the unique value of this format lies.
When processing The Ugly, the facilitator role is to manage emotional temperature. If a topic triggers strong reactions, pause and acknowledge the emotion: "I can see this resonates. Let's take a moment before we continue." For each ugly issue, guide the team toward understanding rather than fixing—"What is really happening here? How long has this been true? What would need to change for this to improve?" Not every ugly issue needs an immediate action item; sometimes acknowledgment itself is the intervention.
Tips for getting the most out of The Good - The Bad - The Ugly
The most common mistake is treating "The Ugly" as just "The Very Bad." There is a qualitative difference, not just a quantitative one. Bad items are problems with known solutions—they just need prioritization. Ugly items are systemic, cultural, or structural issues where the solution is unclear or politically difficult. Help participants understand this distinction: "A bug in production is bad. A culture where nobody feels safe saying a deadline is unrealistic is ugly."
Do not force resolution of every ugly item in a single session. Some ugly truths need time to be fully understood before action is appropriate. It is acceptable—and sometimes wise—to close an ugly topic with "we have named this, and we will revisit it in two weeks after we have all reflected." Premature solutions to complex problems can be worse than no solution at all.
Follow up is non-negotiable. If the team surfaces an ugly truth and nothing changes, you have actively damaged trust. Before closing the retro, explicitly state what will happen next with each ugly item: "I will raise this with leadership by Friday," or "We will dedicate our next retro entirely to exploring solutions for this." Document commitments and follow through visibly.
Variations and adaptations
For remote teams, anonymous submission for the Ugly column is essential. Use a tool that allows truly anonymous card creation—not just hidden authorship that the facilitator can see. Consider having participants submit Ugly items 24 hours before the session so the facilitator can prepare for sensitive topics and plan emotional management strategies. The synchronous session should use video to maintain human connection during difficult conversations.
For async teams, this format is challenging because the Ugly column benefits enormously from real-time human interaction. If fully async is the only option, replace the Ugly column with a "Concerns I Want to Discuss" column and hold a mandatory synchronous session for those discussions. The written async format works for Good and Bad but falls short for Ugly because tone, nuance, and emotional support require real-time presence.
A variation for teams with high psychological safety adds a fourth column: "The Beautiful"—moments of exceptional teamwork, breakthrough solutions, or personal growth that deserve more than routine acknowledgment. Starting with The Beautiful sets a strong positive foundation before moving into challenging territory. Another adaptation for leadership teams replaces team-level issues with organizational-level ones: The Good about company culture, The Bad about cross-team friction, and The Ugly about structural problems that leadership must own.
Run Retrospectives in CodeKudu
CodeKudu includes dozens of retrospective board templates, anonymous feedback, AI summaries, and action items that sync to GitHub Issues, Jira, and Linear.
