Launch Retrospective Template: Review What Worked and Decide What to Do Next
A launch retrospective is a written review, done a week or so after you launch, that records what each channel actually sent, what people did once they arrived, what surprised you and what you will do differently. Its output is a decision, not a diary. Use the private one-pager for yourself, the channel scorecard to compare where visits and sign-ups came from, and the public write-up if you want to share what you learned.
When should you hold the review, and what is it for?
Do it twice. Once about a week after you published, when the first rush of visits and comments is over but you still remember what you did. And once at thirty days, when the slower effects such as search traffic and referrals have had time to show. The first review decides what to fix and where to post next. The second decides whether the launch did what you wanted it to, and what the next one should look like.
The point of a retrospective is not to feel good or bad about the number of visits. It is to separate what you did from what happened to you. Posting at a different hour, rewriting the tagline or adding a screenshot are things you control. A big site linking to you for a day is not. If you cannot tell the two apart, you will repeat the luck and skip the lesson.
What do you need to collect before you write?
- Visits by source, from your analytics, with each launch place tagged so it shows separately. If you did not tag links, say so in the review and tag them next time; the UTM tagging page shows how.
- What a visit turned into: sign-ups, installs, trial starts or replies. Pick the one action that matters for your product and count only that.
- Every comment, reply and message, copied into one list.
- The dates and times you posted each thing, and what you did in the hour after.
- Your own list of promises, such as “reply to everything within a day”, and whether you kept them.
Leave a number blank if you do not have it. A blank is honest and tells you what to measure next time. A guessed figure turns into a fact in your head within a week. The launch metrics to track page lists what is worth recording, and the free launch directory traffic calculator turns visits and sign-ups into rates per source.
Template 1: the private one-pager
LAUNCH REVIEW: [product name], [date range] THE GOAL I SET: [what I wanted from this launch, in one sentence, written before I launched or my honest recollection] DID I GET IT: [yes / partly / no], because [one sentence] WHAT HAPPENED (numbers I actually have) - Visits: [number] total, [number] from my best source ([name]) - The action that counts: [number] ([sign-ups / installs / replies]) - Comments or messages from real people: [number] - Numbers I do not have: [list, so I measure them next time] WHAT I DID THAT MIGHT HAVE MATTERED - [Action I controlled and when] - [Action I controlled and when] WHAT HAPPENED THAT I DID NOT CONTROL - [Luck, timing, someone else's post] WHAT PEOPLE SAID (grouped) - Confusion: [what, how many] - Requests: [what, how many] - Praise: [specifics] THREE DECISIONS 1. Stop: [one thing] 2. Start: [one thing] 3. Do again, but better: [one thing] NEXT REVIEW DATE: [date]
Template 2: the channel scorecard
Use a scorecard when you posted in several places and want to know which deserves your next evening. Fill one row per place. The last column is the one that matters, and it can be a plain-words judgement.
Channel: [name] Date posted: [date] Effort spent: [hours] Visits: [number] Target action: [number] Rate: [action divided by visits] Quality of conversation: [replies from the right kind of person, yes/no, an example] Would I post there again?: [yes / change the approach / no] Why: [one sentence]
Divide the action by visits, not by effort, so a small, well-aimed source shows up as the better one. Ranking channels by raw visits favours broad audiences, which are often the least ready to act. Keep the effort column anyway: a channel that took ten hours and returned two replies is a different decision from one that took thirty minutes.
Template 3: the public write-up
Writing the review in public is useful if you are building an audience and are honest about the numbers. It also gives you something to post a few weeks after launch, when attention has moved on. Include only figures you really have, and do not round them up.
Title: What happened when I launched [product name]: [one real number or fact], and what I'd change [Opening: what you built and what you hoped would happen, two sentences.] What I did: [list, in order, with dates]. What happened: [real numbers, with their source, such as "my analytics show..."]. [What surprised you.] What I got wrong: [one or two honest mistakes]. What I'm doing next: [one or two concrete steps]. If you're launching something yourself, the one thing I'd tell you: [one lesson, specific to what you saw].
How do you turn the review into a decision?
| What the review shows | A reasonable next step |
|---|---|
| Visits arrived, almost no one took the action | Fix the page or the first-run path before posting anywhere new; the traffic is not the problem |
| Few visits, but those who came acted | Find more of that audience in places like where you found them |
| Plenty of comments, no usage | The idea resonates and the product does not deliver yet; talk to commenters |
| Nothing on any measure | Check that links worked and were tagged, then revisit who the product is for |
Then write the next experiment in one line and put a date on it. A retrospective that ends without a dated next step has not changed anything. If you are choosing where the next effort should go, the post-launch checklist lists what usually follows, and how to measure a launch explains the measurement choices behind the template.
What if you have not launched yet?
Write the first section of the one-pager now: the goal. It is the line people most often skip, and the review is meaningless without it. Then launch your product free, tag the link, and put the review date in your calendar. A board with no queue means there is a live page to measure the same day, whatever the numbers turn out to be. Founders building in public may like the guide on building in public, and the board’s finance ideas show how other makers frame the goals of small products.
Frequently asked questions
How long should a launch retrospective take?
An hour for the first one, once the numbers are collected. If it takes longer, you are probably writing a narrative instead of a decision. Fill in the one-pager, make three decisions, date the next review, and stop. The collection step, which is the real work, gets quicker once your links are tagged.
What numbers should I include?
Only ones you actually measured: visits by source, the one action that matters for your product, and the count of real replies. Leave blanks for anything you do not have. Do not include guesses or comparisons to launches you cannot cite, and do not round up. A short, true review is more useful than a long, flattering one.
Should I share my retrospective publicly?
Only if you want to and can be honest about the figures. Public retrospectives can attract readers who like transparent builders, but they are not required, and a flattering version damages trust. If you share, say where the numbers came from and include one real mistake and one thing you will change.
What if the launch went badly?
Treat it as information. Check whether the problem was reach, the page, the product or the audience, using the table above, and change one of them before trying again. A launch that produced no visits can still produce replies, and a quiet launch rarely ends the product; stopping to learn from it is the useful part.
Written by Post your build ideas with AI assistance and edited for this site. Where a page names another product, the facts came from that product’s own pages on the date shown above; terms change, so check them before you rely on them. About the publisher.