Keys to a good After Action Review meeting:
0. Only include the people who took part in the action (including planning it)
1. No names, no ranks - everybody speaks their mind, and past performance is referred to by title or position, never by name. No ego, no fear, just truth and openness. Everybody is subordinate to the mission.
2. Focus is on fixing the future (not assigning blame for the past)
3. Put the needs of the firm above your need to be right, to be perfect, to be safe - approach the task of improving our process with humility and candor.
4. The seven stages of the debrief are STEALTH:
[S] Set time, location, and prepare
- assign roles: timekeeper, scribe, data input person, discussion leader (same as mission planner)
- inform everyone what they need to bring
- prepare the room with flip charts, clean table tops
- start on time / keep on schedule / end on time
[T] Tone is nameless, rankless
- lead by example; be open
- talk in the third person - never "I" or "you" but "the lead carpenter", "the estimator"
- don't care about WHO is right - care about WHAT is right
[E] Execution vs. Objectives -
- were objectives SMART?
- reconstruct the sequence of events
- did we accomplish the mission?
[A] Analyze execution
- list errors and successes
- for each error/success, list cause(s)
- identify underlying root cause(s) of each
[L] Lessons Learned
- prominent or recurring root causes
[T] Transfer Lessons Learned - make part of future process
[H] High note - positive summation
Source: "Flawless Execution" by James D. Murphy, ISBN 0-06-083416-1
(http://www.afterburnerseminars.com/ )
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I like it all except one thing. Focusing on the mission and future instead of the past, solutions instead of blame, truth instead of fear, etc. Spot on!!
The one thing I have to vehement exception to is: Using things like "the estimator" and "the lead carpenter". I think this is bullshit! It's ALL about the people on the team, not just the roles they are playing. And it's about who signed up to take a specific action and the RESPONSIBILITY they have taken (especially when they put their most precious asset on the action: their name.) I've successfully led 4 to 250 people to accomplish unbelievable goals, and did so by respecting each member of the team as a person, in the role, and much more than JUST THAT ROLE. But what they could make of it. Leadership vs. management vs administrator vs supervisor.
Anyway - just my personal opinion, based on experience. However, if your process works, then by all means, go for it!
I liked the post. It discusses the topic very nicely. But I have one thing to say, that is; it is right to not assign blame for the past but if we do not consider the past experience then our planning will surely hamper and have some drawback. As the Author does not clear that part in his post so I have little confusion on what he is trying to say,..
good bye,..
Boot camp
Post a Comment