What Are Liberating Structures?
Liberating Structures are a framework for facilitation created by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless, consisting of 33 microstructures designed to build trust and enhance cooperation and communication between teammates. They're well suited to improve the level of engagement among participants of Scrum events, thus stimulating the kind of outcomes that are necessary to create learning organizations.
Traditional meeting formats—presentations, open discussions, status updates—tend to favor certain participants while marginalizing others. The confident extrovert dominates while thoughtful introverts remain silent. The senior architect's opinion carries undue weight while junior developers' insights go unheard. Liberating Structures level this playing field through deliberate process design.
Each structure follows specific rules for how people interact: who speaks when, for how long, in what group configuration, addressing which question. These constraints sound restrictive but actually liberate participation. When everyone knows the format, psychological safety increases—you're not figuring out whether to speak up; the structure tells you it's your turn.
For remote teams, these structures are particularly valuable in Agile, Lean, and DevOps environments where team engagement, psychological safety, and continuous adaptation are essential. They can be used in Sprint Reviews, Retrospectives, product discovery, or stakeholder workshops. The good news: 85-90% of Liberating Structures can be adapted for virtual use with some imagination plus trial-and-error.
Core Virtual Design Principles
Virtual Liberating Structures share common design principles that make them work in distributed settings:
Breakout rooms divide participants into smaller workgroups, starting with pairs. Large group discussions on video calls favor the loudest voices. Breakout rooms create intimacy where everyone speaks. The structure might have people start in pairs (maximum safety for sharing), then groups of four (more perspectives), then reconvene as a full group (synthesis).
Muting/unmuting marks different participant states. When you're in listening mode, you're muted. When contributing, you unmute. This simple norm reduces background noise and makes it clear who's speaking. Tools like Zoom's "unmute all" for specific segments or "mute on entry" streamline this.
Workbooks provide instructions for breakout room activities. When participants disappear into breakout rooms, they need clear instructions without the facilitator present. Shared documents (Google Docs, Miro boards, Mural canvases) contain prompts, timers, and templates guiding the breakout activity. This written clarity prevents confusion.
Chat channels facilitate whole-group communication. During activities, people post observations, questions, or outputs in chat. This creates a written record and enables asynchronous participation. Someone who's momentarily distracted can catch up via chat. Shy participants can contribute ideas in writing before speaking.
These design principles combine to create structured participation that works despite physical distance and varying technical setups. Let's examine specific structures and how to facilitate them virtually.
1-2-4-All: Building Ideas from Individual to Collective
Purpose: Engage everyone simultaneously in generating ideas, then build on them through progressively larger groups. Perfect for sprint retrospectives, problem-solving, or generating backlog items.
Time: 12-15 minutes
Virtual Setup: Zoom/Teams with breakout room capability, shared whiteboard (Miro/Mural), or collaborative document.
How it works:
1 (Silent reflection, 1 minute): Everyone individually reflects on a question. "What's one thing that slowed us down this sprint?" Participants write their thoughts privately (notepad, private chat to themselves, or in a prepared template).
2 (Pairs, 2 minutes): Automatic breakout into pairs. Each person shares their idea. The pair identifies common themes or builds on each other's thinking. No need to agree—just listen and build understanding.
4 (Foursomes, 4 minutes): Pairs join to make groups of four. Each pair shares their key insight. The group of four notices patterns: "We all mentioned testing bottlenecks" or identifies the most actionable idea to bring back.
All (Whole group, 5 minutes): Reconvene everyone. Each group of four shares one key finding. The facilitator captures themes on a shared board. The full group sees patterns emerge across multiple small-group discussions.
Why it works: The structure ensures everyone's voice enters the conversation (during the individual and pairs phases) before group dynamics can silence them. Ideas are refined through multiple lenses (pairs question your thinking, foursomes test broader relevance) before hitting the full group. By the time ideas reach "All," they've been battle-tested and represent collective intelligence rather than individual hobby horses.
Virtual facilitation tips: Pre-create breakout rooms to save time during transitions. Use Zoom's auto-assign for pairs/fours to prevent choice paralysis. Broadcast messages to breakout rooms with 30-second warnings before reconvening. Use a shared Miro board where groups post their key finding—this creates a visual record and prevents duplication when sharing back.
TRIZ: Surfacing and Stopping Bad Practices
Purpose: Identify counterproductive behaviors the team wants to stop. Particularly powerful in retrospectives when direct criticism feels risky—the inversion makes it psychologically safer.
Time: 35 minutes
Virtual Setup: Requires breakout rooms, embedded 1-2-4-All, joined workspaces, and Shift & Share. Time-keeping via breakout room broadcasting is recommended as participants are likely to be highly engaged and may lose track of time.
How it works:
Part 1: Worst practices (1-2-4-All, 12 minutes): Question: "What could we do to absolutely guarantee sprint failure?" Individual brainstorm (1 min) → Pairs share worst practices (2 min) → Foursomes compile an outrageous list (4 min) → All groups share their top worst practices (5 min). This inversion ("make it worse") is often hilarious—people enthusiastically describe dysfunction, which releases tension.
Part 2: Current reality check (Individual + pairs, 8 minutes): Question: "Which of these terrible practices are we actually doing now?" Individually review the compiled worst practices list and honestly identify which ones currently happen (3 min). In pairs, discuss what you noticed (5 min). This step transitions from humor to honesty.
Part 3: Commit to stop (1-2-4-All, 15 minutes): Question: "What practice should we commit to stopping immediately?" Individual selection (1 min) → Pairs discuss and narrow to top choice (3 min) → Foursomes agree on one practice to kill (5 min) → All groups share their selection and team commits to 1-3 practices to eliminate (6 min).
Why it works: Asking "what makes us fail?" feels safer than "what are we doing wrong?" The inversion creates psychological distance—you're discussing hypotheticals before confronting reality. The structure surfaces honest feedback that direct retrospective questions often miss because people don't want to criticize teammates. By Part 3, the team is ready to commit to stopping real dysfunctions because they've named them collectively, not as individual complaints.
Virtual facilitation tips: Create a shared document with three sections (Worst Practices, Current Reality, Commit to Stop) that teams add to during each phase. Use breakout room broadcast for time warnings—TRIZ is engaging and groups lose track of time. After Part 1, compile all worst practices into a single list before Part 2 begins. During All-share segments, use chat for groups to post their commitments simultaneously, then discuss—this prevents first-mover bias in what practices get selected.
Troika Consulting: Peer Coaching for Tough Problems
Purpose: Get help from peers on a specific challenge you're facing. Works beautifully for technical problems, process bottlenecks, or interpersonal dilemmas in sprint work.
Time: 6-7 minutes per round (multiple rounds possible)
Virtual Setup: Create breakout rooms for groups of three. Consultants and the consultee have the initial conversation; then the consultee turns around on their chair for the consulting phase. Alternatively, both consultants stop broadcasting their video so the consultee is just listening.
How it works:
Setup (1 minute): In groups of three, identify who presents a challenge first (the client). The other two are consultants.
Client describes challenge (1-2 minutes): Client explains their problem or dilemma clearly and concisely. "I'm stuck on how to refactor this legacy authentication module without breaking the current implementation." Consultants listen without interrupting.
Consultants ask clarifying questions (1-2 minutes): Consultants ask questions to better understand the situation. "What's your biggest constraint—time, technical complexity, or testing coverage?" Client answers briefly. This isn't problem-solving yet—just understanding.
Client turns around (virtual: turns off video) (2-3 minutes): Client "leaves the room" by turning their chair or disabling video. They listen but don't respond. Consultants discuss ideas, suggestions, and recommendations as if the client isn't there. "I'd start with characterization tests to lock in current behavior..." "What if we use the strangler fig pattern..." The client just listens and takes notes.
Client returns and shares takeaways (1 minute): Client turns back around (or turns video on). They share which ideas resonated and what they'll try. Brief, not a lengthy discussion.
Rotate roles so each person gets to be the client if time allows. With 3 people, you need about 20 minutes total for everyone to present a challenge.
Why it works: The client gets peer input without the dynamic of defending their current approach—they're just listening while consultants brainstorm. Consultants speak more freely when the client isn't actively participating, avoiding the politeness that prevents honest feedback. The brevity (2-3 minutes of consulting) prevents over-advice and forces consultants to prioritize their most valuable insights.
Virtual facilitation tips: Brief participants on the "turn around" convention before starting—disabling video or physically turning away from camera. Strictly time-keep each segment. The structure works because of tight timeboxes. Use chat for clients to note ideas while consultants discuss—this gives them something to do and captures insights without disrupting the consulting conversation.
25/10 Crowdsourcing: Generating Bold Ideas Fast
Purpose: Rapidly identify the most promising ideas from many proposals. Perfect for innovation sessions, backlog prioritization, or sprint improvement initiatives. Enables groups to generate bold ideas in less than 20 minutes.
Time: 20-30 minutes
Virtual Setup: Shared document or collaboration board, video call for social dynamics.
How it works:
Silent idea generation (5 minutes): Each individual silently writes down a bold idea addressing the challenge. "What's one thing we could try next sprint that might dramatically improve velocity?" Ideas should be specific enough to act on. Post ideas in a shared document where everyone can see them.
Five rounds of rating (15 minutes, 3 min per round): Participants rate 1/5 of the ideas in each round on a 1-10 scale. Each person rates 5-6 ideas per round, different ideas each round. Rating question: "How attractive or powerful is this idea?" The cumulative ratings reveal which ideas resonate broadly. You can use forms, spreadsheets, or tools like Mentimeter for anonymous rating.
Top ideas discussion (10 minutes): Calculate average scores. Discuss the top 3-5 highest-rated ideas. Authors explain their thinking. Group decides which to pursue. The crowd's collective judgment surfaces the most promising ideas—not the facilitator's preference or the loudest voice.
Why it works: Every person generates an idea—full engagement from the start. Ideas are evaluated based on merit (average score from multiple raters) rather than who proposed them or how persuasively they're pitched. The rating process is fast—three minutes per round prevents overthinking. Bold ideas get surfaced because the structure encourages ambitious thinking and the crowd filters for what's both bold and feasible.
Virtual facilitation tips: Use a Google Sheet with one column for ideas and five columns for rating rounds. Each row is an idea, each cell is a score. Automatically calculate averages. Assign specific ideas to specific people for each round to prevent everyone rating the same ideas. Use conditional formatting to highlight high-scoring ideas automatically—makes results instantly visible.
Integrating Liberating Structures into Scrum Ceremonies
How do these structures fit into your existing Scrum rhythms? Here are proven applications:
Sprint Planning: Use Celebrity Interview for the Product Owner to introduce the upcoming Sprint's business objective. This 15-minute structure has the PO interviewed by a teammate rather than presenting—creates more engaging context-setting. Use 1-2-4-All for estimating complex stories where perspectives vary widely—the structure ensures estimation discussion happens before voting, improving accuracy. Tools like FreeScrumPoker can supplement these structures for the actual estimation voting.
Daily Standup: Occasionally use Troika Consulting (quick 5-minute version) when someone's blocked. Instead of "I'm blocked on X" going unresolved, immediately breakout into a troika where two teammates consult on the blocker. Resolves issues faster than traditional standups where blockers are just noted.
Sprint Review: Use 1-2-4-All for gathering stakeholder feedback after demos. Rather than open-ended "any questions?" that gets crickets, ask specifically: "What's one thing about this feature that could be improved?" Individual reflection → Pairs discuss → Foursomes synthesize → All share back. You get structured, actionable feedback instead of silence or rambling comments.
Sprint Retrospective: TRIZ for identifying dysfunctions to stop. 25/10 Crowdsourcing for generating improvement ideas. 1-2-4-All for literally any retrospective question ("What went well?" "What could improve?" "What will we commit to changing?"). The structures make retros engaging instead of repetitive. Tools like Retrium, FunRetro, and TeamRetro integrate well with these structures—many have prefabricated templates.
Backlog Refinement: Use 1-2-4-All when breaking epics into stories. Product Owner presents the epic, then teams use 1-2-4-All to generate potential story breakdowns. This crowdsources the decomposition rather than making it the PO's solo work. Use 25/10 Crowdsourcing to prioritize features when stakeholder opinions conflict—let the structure reveal what has broad support.
Virtual Liberating Structures can help overcome communication disadvantages of distributed teams by visualizing issues and giving every member of the Scrum team a fair share of airtime. The key is intentional design—don't use structures randomly, use them purposefully when standard formats aren't producing the engagement or insights you need.
Tools for Virtual Facilitation
Effective virtual Liberating Structures require the right technical infrastructure. Well-known specialized providers include Retrium, FunRetro, and TeamRetro for retrospectives. Digital workspace applications like Miro and Mural often have prefabricated templates for various structures.
Video conferencing essentials: Breakout room capability (Zoom, Teams, Google Meet all support this). Screen sharing for presenting questions and templates. Broadcasting to breakout rooms for time warnings. Automatic assignment to breakout groups to speed transitions.
Collaboration boards: Miro and Mural for visual brainstorming, sticky notes, and template-based facilitation. Both have templates for popular Liberating Structures. Google Jamboard for simpler visual collaboration. FigJam (Figma's collaboration tool) increasingly popular for design teams doing Scrum.
Document collaboration: Google Docs for text-based structures like 1-2-4-All where you're capturing ideas. Commenting features enable threaded discussions. Version history shows evolution of thinking. Google Sheets for rating-based structures like 25/10 Crowdsourcing. Formulas automatically calculate scores.
Specialized retro tools: Retrium, FunRetro, TeamRetro all designed specifically for remote retrospectives. They include built-in Liberating Structures templates, voting mechanisms, action item tracking, and integration with Jira/other project tools. For teams doing frequent retros, these purpose-built tools justify their cost through time savings.
Similar to how engagement platforms create structured interaction patterns, these tools provide the technical foundation for Liberating Structures to function remotely. The tool isn't the structure—it enables the structure by handling logistics so facilitators focus on process.
Common Facilitation Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
Even with strong structures, facilitation can go wrong:
Pitfall #1: Rushing through steps to "save time." The timing in Liberating Structures is deliberate. Skipping the individual reflection in 1-2-4-All destroys the structure's purpose. Give each phase its full time even if it feels awkward initially.
Pitfall #2: Explaining structures while people are doing them. Brief people on the entire structure upfront, then execute without re-explaining during each phase. Create simple instruction sheets participants can reference. Mid-structure explanations create confusion and waste the timed phases.
Pitfall #3: Not enforcing the rules. In Troika Consulting, if the client doesn't turn around and starts defending their position during the consulting phase, the structure fails. Gently enforce the rules: "Sarah, remember you're just listening right now—you'll respond in a minute." The rules are what make structures work.
Pitfall #4: Using structures for everything. Not every situation needs a Liberating Structure. Sometimes a straightforward discussion is appropriate. Use structures when you need: equal participation, rapid idea generation, surfacing difficult truths, or preventing dominant voices from taking over. Don't use them just because they're cool.
Pitfall #5: Poor technical execution. Fumbling with breakout rooms, losing shared document links, or malfunctioning timers destroys flow. Test your technical setup before the session. Have backup plans: if breakout rooms fail, use the main room but have pairs mute and use private chat. If your collaboration board crashes, switch to a shared doc.
The Future: Liberating Structures in 2025 and Beyond
The Liberating Structures community continues growing and innovating. The Liberating Structures Global Gathering is coming to Brussels, Belgium, on June 19th and 20th, 2025. This two-day event will unite a diverse community of global facilitators, changemakers, and curious minds through Options Space, a dynamic, participant-driven format.
Emerging trends include AI-assisted facilitation where tools suggest which structure fits your meeting purpose, hybrid structures combining in-person and remote participants simultaneously (using the same structure across both modes), and integration of Liberating Structures into project management platforms so they're one click away instead of requiring separate tools.
The core insight remains: traditional meeting formats privilege certain voices while silencing others. Distributed work amplifies this problem—without deliberate structure, remote meetings become monologues to silent cameras. Liberating Structures provide antidotes through purposeful interaction design.
Getting Started with Virtual Liberating Structures
Don't try to master all 33 structures immediately. Start with one:
Week 1: Try 1-2-4-All in your next retrospective. Pick one retro question and use the structure instead of open discussion. Note what changes about participation and insights. This structure is forgiving—hard to mess up badly.
Week 2-3: Practice the structure you tried. The second time is always smoother. You'll facilitate timing better, explain more clearly, and handle technical logistics more confidently. Muscle memory develops.
Week 4: Add a second structure. Try TRIZ or Troika Consulting. Use it when you encounter a situation it's designed for (TRIZ for surfacing dysfunction, Troika for peer consulting on blockers). Context helps structures stick.
Month 2: Experiment with combining structures. A retrospective might use 1-2-4-All for "What went well?" then TRIZ for "What should we stop?" then 25/10 for "What should we try next sprint?" Sequences create powerful outcomes.
Month 3+: Build a facilitation toolkit. Have go-to structures for common situations: retros defaulting to TRIZ, backlog refinement using 1-2-4-All, technical problem-solving using Troika. Structures become natural rather than novel.
Visit the official Liberating Structures website for detailed descriptions of all 33 structures, virtual adaptation tips, and a global community of practitioners sharing experiences. The framework is open source—free to use, adapt, and share.
The Bottom Line
Remote Scrum ceremonies don't have to be boring or exclusive. When three people dominate every discussion while seven stay silent, you're losing collective intelligence. When retrospectives produce the same generic action items sprint after sprint, your improvement process is broken. When sprint planning becomes a negotiation between product owner and the loudest developer, you're not doing Scrum—you're doing command-and-control with agile vocabulary.
Virtual Liberating Structures fix these dysfunctions through purposeful interaction design. They don't magically solve all problems—you still need clear sprint goals, well-refined stories, and team skill. But they unlock the participation and honest dialogue that lets teams apply those fundamentals effectively.
The investment is modest: learning 3-4 core structures takes a few hours. The facilitation overhead adds maybe 5-10 minutes to ceremonies while dramatically improving outcomes. The return: more engaged teams, better insights, decisions representing collective wisdom instead of individual dominance.
For distributed Scrum teams in 2025, mastering Virtual Liberating Structures isn't optional nice-to-have facilitation skill—it's essential craft for making remote collaboration work. The teams that learn these structures gain engagement advantages traditional meeting formats can't match. Start with one structure in your next ceremony. Notice what changes. Build from there. Your team's participation will thank you.
For teams looking to enhance their virtual Scrum practices, tools like FreeScrumPoker complement Liberating Structures by providing structured estimation capabilities. Combined with platforms enabling knowledge sharing and collaboration and secure verification systems, distributed teams can create comprehensive facilitation environments where Liberating Structures thrive.