Pre-mortem analysis - Revision history

S202894: /* Annotated bibliography */

2021-02-28T17:49:22Z

Annotated bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:49, 28 February 2021
Line 132:		Line 132:
	This book provides a detailed insight into the aspect of human resource management. Useful to investigate how team members can be conditioned in making decisions and therefore understand the advantages that pre-mortem entails in decreasing cognitive bias.		This book provides a detailed insight into the aspect of human resource management. Useful to investigate how team members can be conditioned in making decisions and therefore understand the advantages that pre-mortem entails in decreasing cognitive bias.

	*~~Beth Veinott~~, Gary A. ~~Klein~~, ~~Sterling Wiggins~~. ''~~Evaluating~~ the ~~Effectiveness~~ of ~~the PreMortem Technique~~ on ~~Plan Confidence''~~, ~~Proceedings~~ of ~~the 7th International ISCRAM Conference – Seattle, USA, May 2010~~.		*''Performing a Project Premortem'' by Gary Klein, Harvard Business Review, September 2007

			This article is certainly of great relevance as Gary Klein theorizes for the first time the method of pre-mortem analysis. Framework and short application examples are provided.

			*Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2019). ''Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects''. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI).

			the book deals with the topic of risk management in a detailed and in-depth manner. Pre-mortem analysis focuses on preventing any risks and helps ensure an agile response to them. The book addresses various aspects of risk management, providing detailed frameworks. It explains how to behave in case of unexpected situations that can happen and must be handeled with a managerial approach.

	==References==		==References==

S202894: /* Annotated bibliography */

2021-02-28T17:09:44Z

Annotated bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 28 February 2021
Line 128:		Line 128:

	==Annotated bibliography==		==Annotated bibliography==
	*Trost, Armin (2019). ''Human Resources Strategies. Balancing Stability and Agility in Times of Digitization'', Publisher. Springer~~: this~~ book provides a detailed insight into the aspect of human resource management. Useful to investigate how team members can be conditioned in making decisions and therefore understand the advantages that pre-mortem entails in decreasing cognitive bias.		*Trost, Armin (2019). ''Human Resources Strategies. Balancing Stability and Agility in Times of Digitization'', Publisher. Springer

			This book provides a detailed insight into the aspect of human resource management. Useful to investigate how team members can be conditioned in making decisions and therefore understand the advantages that pre-mortem entails in decreasing cognitive bias.

	*Beth Veinott, Gary A. Klein, Sterling Wiggins. ''Evaluating the Effectiveness of the PreMortem Technique on Plan Confidence'', Proceedings of the 7th International ISCRAM Conference – Seattle, USA, May 2010.		*Beth Veinott, Gary A. Klein, Sterling Wiggins. ''Evaluating the Effectiveness of the PreMortem Technique on Plan Confidence'', Proceedings of the 7th International ISCRAM Conference – Seattle, USA, May 2010.

S202894: /* Annotated bibliography */

2021-02-28T17:09:17Z

Annotated bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 28 February 2021
Line 128:		Line 128:

	==Annotated bibliography==		==Annotated bibliography==
	*Trost, Armin (2019). ''Human Resources Strategies. Balancing Stability and Agility in Times of Digitization'', Publisher. Springer		*Trost, Armin (2019). ''Human Resources Strategies. Balancing Stability and Agility in Times of Digitization'', Publisher. Springer: this book provides a detailed insight into the aspect of human resource management. Useful to investigate how team members can be conditioned in making decisions and therefore understand the advantages that pre-mortem entails in decreasing cognitive bias.

	*Beth Veinott, Gary A. Klein, Sterling Wiggins. ''Evaluating the Effectiveness of the PreMortem Technique on Plan Confidence'', Proceedings of the 7th International ISCRAM Conference – Seattle, USA, May 2010.		*Beth Veinott, Gary A. Klein, Sterling Wiggins. ''Evaluating the Effectiveness of the PreMortem Technique on Plan Confidence'', Proceedings of the 7th International ISCRAM Conference – Seattle, USA, May 2010.

S202894: /* References */

2021-02-28T16:58:44Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:58, 28 February 2021
Line 135:		Line 135:
	<references>		<references>

	<ref name="R1"> Blanco, F. (2017). ''Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior'', Publisher: Springer Editors: Jennifer Vonk, Tom Shackelford. </ref>		<ref name="R1"> Blanco, F. (2017). ''Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior'', Publisher: Springer, Editors: Jennifer Vonk, Tom Shackelford. </ref>

	<ref name="R2"> A. Wilke, R. Mata, Cognitive Bias, Editor(s): V.S. Ramachandran, Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Second Edition), Academic Press, 2012, Pages 531-535. </ref>		<ref name="R2"> A. Wilke, R. Mata, Cognitive Bias, Editor(s): V.S. Ramachandran, Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Second Edition), Academic Press, 2012, Pages 531-535. </ref>
Line 141:		Line 141:
	<ref name="R3"> Mike Pinder, ''16 cognitive biases that can kill your decision making'', https://www.boardofinnovation.com/blog/16-cognitive-biases-that-kill-innovative-thinking/. </ref>		<ref name="R3"> Mike Pinder, ''16 cognitive biases that can kill your decision making'', https://www.boardofinnovation.com/blog/16-cognitive-biases-that-kill-innovative-thinking/. </ref>

	<ref name="R4"> J. Ehrlinger, W.O. Readinger, B. Kim (2016), ''Encyclopedia of Mental Health'' Chapter: Decision-Making and Cognitive Biases. </ref>		<ref name="R4"> J. Ehrlinger, W.O. Readinger, B. Kim (2016), ''Encyclopedia of Mental Health'', Chapter: Decision-Making and Cognitive Biases. </ref>

	<ref name="R5"> Deborah J. Mitchell, J. Edward Russo, Nancy Pennington (1989). ''Back to the future: Temporal perspective in the explanation of events'', Journal of Behavioral Decision MakingVolume 2, Issue 1 p. 25-38. </ref>		<ref name="R5"> Deborah J. Mitchell, J. Edward Russo, Nancy Pennington (1989). ''Back to the future: Temporal perspective in the explanation of events'', Journal of Behavioral Decision MakingVolume 2, Issue 1 p. 25-38. </ref>

S202894 at 16:54, 28 February 2021

2021-02-28T16:54:58Z

@@ Line 98: / Line 98: @@
 They need to find as many causes as possible and actively participate in brainstorming without being afraid to express any opinion. They can come from different sectors to ensure a broad view on all aspects of the project.
 ==Overview of Benefits and Limitations==
@@ Line 127: / Line 118: @@
 The biggest limitation in applying this tool is the risk of spending resources such as time and money trying to prevent possible causes that may never actually happen and influence the team with an excessively negative view of the project.
 ==Annotated bibliography==

S202894: /* Benefits */

2021-02-28T16:53:03Z

Benefits

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:53, 28 February 2021
Line 112:		Line 112:
	===Benefits===		===Benefits===

	*Bias-free and diverse analysis of all potential project issues		*Bias-free and diverse analysis of all potential project issues<ref name="R8" />
	*Stakeholder alignment on key weaknesses in the project and how to prevent them		*Stakeholder alignment on key weaknesses in the project and how to prevent them<ref name="R8" />
	*Action plan to prevent failures from occurring		*Action plan to prevent failures from occurring<ref name="R8" />
	*Corporate culture that encourages raising issues rather than ignoring them <ref name="R8" />		*Corporate culture that encourages raising issues rather than ignoring them<ref name="R8" />
	*Limit groupthink and overconfidence		*Limit groupthink and overconfidence
	*Improve agility by enable successful responses to threats		*Improve agility by enable successful responses to threats

S202894: /* Practical use and leverage of other tools */

2021-02-28T16:51:48Z

Practical use and leverage of other tools

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:51, 28 February 2021
Line 72:		Line 72:
	As suggested by Theodore Eckert <ref name="R7" />, a relevant technique for doing this is called '''"The five whys"'''. Team members select one of the problems identified with the pre-mortem and ask a simple question: "why?". Let's assume that one of the causes to be analyzed is the lack of time to complete the project. Answer the question "why?" leads to different answers (e.g. the deadline requested by a customer was too close, too much time was used in one phase of the project, the company's resources were not sufficient, etc.). For each of these reasons ask "why?" again. Continue like this until asking "why?" five times. The result will be a more in-depth analysis that identifies the root causes on which management can intervene to prevent the failure of the project.		As suggested by Theodore Eckert <ref name="R7" />, a relevant technique for doing this is called '''"The five whys"'''. Team members select one of the problems identified with the pre-mortem and ask a simple question: "why?". Let's assume that one of the causes to be analyzed is the lack of time to complete the project. Answer the question "why?" leads to different answers (e.g. the deadline requested by a customer was too close, too much time was used in one phase of the project, the company's resources were not sufficient, etc.). For each of these reasons ask "why?" again. Continue like this until asking "why?" five times. The result will be a more in-depth analysis that identifies the root causes on which management can intervene to prevent the failure of the project.

	To make this process even more efficient it is useful to use an '''Ishikawa diagram'', also known as '''Fishbone diagram'''. This allows an immediate visualization of the problem and its causes, from the root causes to those arising from them.		To make this process even more efficient it is useful to use an '''Ishikawa diagram''', also known as '''Fishbone diagram'''. This allows an immediate visualization of the problem and its causes, from the root causes to those arising from them.

	===The main roles===		===The main roles===

S202894 at 16:51, 28 February 2021

2021-02-28T16:51:11Z

@@ Line 99: / Line 99: @@
 They need to find as many causes as possible and actively participate in brainstorming without being afraid to express any opinion. They can come from different sectors to ensure a broad view on all aspects of the project.
-==Limitations==
+'''Project management:''' There are numerous advantages that a pre-mortem analysis can bring in the context of project management. Having a clear idea of the causes of project failure helps to focus on the most critical phases and therefore allows you to formulate a more effective project plan. In addition, the whole team is actively involved and therefore motivation increases and with it the ability to collaborate among the members during the project. Moreover, having a diversified team leads to the integration of different approaches to problem solving. Consequently, greater flexibility in dealing with changes and better response to the complexities of the project. Carrying out a thorough pre-mortem by integrating tools useful for identifying root causes (eg The Five Why, Fishbone diagram) considerably limits uncertainty.
-The biggest limitation in applying this tool is the risk of spending so many resources such as time and money trying to prevent possible causes that may never actually happen.
+'''Program management:''' in a program management environment, pre-mortem analysis can help to achieve corporate objectives. Assuming that an adequate analysis is carried out in which the role of Sponsor is present, managers at the strategic level will have a clearer view of the projects that will be undertaken. In this way, program managers will be able to effectively optimize the resource utilization among projects and check if they are aligned with the program’s targets.
 ==Annotated bibliography==
@@ Line 126: / Line 150: @@
 <ref name="R7"> Theodore Eckert, ''The Pre-Mortem.
 An Alternative Method of Predicting Failure'', Safety Certification Engineer Microsoft Corporation Redmond, WA, USA.

S202894 at 16:43, 28 February 2021

2021-02-28T16:43:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:43, 28 February 2021
Line 48:		Line 48:
	===Six steps===		===Six steps===
	A correct application of the pre-mortem analysis can be performed following six main steps:		A correct application of the pre-mortem analysis can be performed following six main steps:

	:1.'''Team Selection and Plan Understanding:''' The project manager selects the team members who will have to carry out the analysis. These do not necessarily have to be highly specialized, the important thing is that they are people involved in the realization of the project, from the conception, design, manufacturing or distribution phase. Then the manager proceeds by illustrating and explaining the project.		:1.'''Team Selection and Plan Understanding:''' The project manager selects the team members who will have to carry out the analysis. These do not necessarily have to be highly specialized, the important thing is that they are people involved in the realization of the project, from the conception, design, manufacturing or distribution phase. Then the manager proceeds by illustrating and explaining the project.

	:2.'''Declare failure:''' the manager declares that the project has failed. Based on the characteristics of the project and the objectives set, he can provide different time horizons (i.e. the project failed after three, six, twelve months of work)		:2.'''Declare failure:''' the manager declares that the project has failed. Based on the characteristics of the project and the objectives set, he can provide different time horizons (i.e. the project failed after three, six, twelve months of work)

	:3.'''Failure Hypothesis:''' At this point each team member is asked to list all possible causes of failure. this phase can take from 10 to 20 minutes and everyone works individually, noting as many hypotheses as possible. When everyone has finished, starting with the project manager, everyone reads one of their reasons and continues in the cycle until they are all read and transcribed in a place where everyone can read them.		:3.'''Failure Hypothesis:''' At this point each team member is asked to list all possible causes of failure. this phase can take from 10 to 20 minutes and everyone works individually, noting as many hypotheses as possible. When everyone has finished, starting with the project manager, everyone reads one of their reasons and continues in the cycle until they are all read and transcribed in a place where everyone can read them.

	:4.'''Suggest fixes:''' now is the time to look for solutions in order to prevent each of the previously hypothesized causes of failure. First of all, priority is given to the causes that are considered most likely to occur and therefore riskier. It is important to take into consideration all hypotheses, even the strangest and, in the case of something that cannot be prevented (i.e. the destruction of the factory due to a natural catastrophe), for example, to declare that in any case there would be no resources. necessary to prevent the event from occurring.		:4.'''Suggest fixes:''' now is the time to look for solutions in order to prevent each of the previously hypothesized causes of failure. First of all, priority is given to the causes that are considered most likely to occur and therefore riskier. It is important to take into consideration all hypotheses, even the strangest and, in the case of something that cannot be prevented (i.e. the destruction of the factory due to a natural catastrophe), for example, to declare that in any case there would be no resources. necessary to prevent the event from occurring.

	:5.'''Revise the plan:''' after discussing all possible countermeasures the plan is reviewed and the necessary measures are taken so that none of the causes of failure listed during the analysis can take place.		:5.'''Revise the plan:''' after discussing all possible countermeasures the plan is reviewed and the necessary measures are taken so that none of the causes of failure listed during the analysis can take place.

	:6.'''Routine recap:''' the list is reviewed at regular intervals during the life cycle of the project to ensure that it is aligned with the plan and make possible updates.		:6.'''Routine recap:''' the list is reviewed at regular intervals during the life cycle of the project to ensure that it is aligned with the plan and make possible updates.

Line 64:		Line 70:

	The outcome of the pre-mortem will be a number of possible reasons of failure but the key point of the analysis is to find the root cause of the identified problem.		The outcome of the pre-mortem will be a number of possible reasons of failure but the key point of the analysis is to find the root cause of the identified problem.
	As suggested by Theodore Eckert <ref name="R7" />, a relevant technique for doing this is called "The five whys". Team members select one of the problems identified with the pre-mortem and ask a simple question: "why?". Let's assume that one of the causes to be analyzed is the lack of time to complete the project. Answer the question "why?" leads to different answers (e.g. the deadline requested by a customer was too close, too much time was used in one phase of the project, the company's resources were not sufficient, etc.). For each of these reasons ask "why?" again. Continue like this until asking "why?" five times. The result will be a more in-depth analysis that identifies the root causes on which management can intervene to prevent the failure of the project.		As suggested by Theodore Eckert <ref name="R7" />, a relevant technique for doing this is called '''"The five whys"'''. Team members select one of the problems identified with the pre-mortem and ask a simple question: "why?". Let's assume that one of the causes to be analyzed is the lack of time to complete the project. Answer the question "why?" leads to different answers (e.g. the deadline requested by a customer was too close, too much time was used in one phase of the project, the company's resources were not sufficient, etc.). For each of these reasons ask "why?" again. Continue like this until asking "why?" five times. The result will be a more in-depth analysis that identifies the root causes on which management can intervene to prevent the failure of the project.

	To make this process even more efficient it is useful to use an Ishikawa diagram, also known as a Fishbone diagram. This allows an immediate visualization of the problem and its causes, from the root causes to those arising from them.		To make this process even more efficient it is useful to use an '''Ishikawa diagram'', also known as '''Fishbone diagram'''. This allows an immediate visualization of the problem and its causes, from the root causes to those arising from them.

	===The main roles===		===The main roles===
Line 73:		Line 79:
	These are the sponsor, presenter, recorder, moderator and participant.<ref name="R7" />		These are the sponsor, presenter, recorder, moderator and participant.<ref name="R7" />

	'''Sponsor''' The sponsor must be represented by a high-ranking figure in the company. Someone who has decision-making power, so as to ensure that the evidence of the analysis is shared and accepted even at the managerial level. Otherwise, there would be a risk that the results are not taken into consideration because they are not considered relevant by those who will have to make the decisions.		'''Sponsor'''

			The sponsor must be represented by a high-ranking figure in the company. Someone who has decision-making power, so as to ensure that the evidence of the analysis is shared and accepted even at the managerial level. Otherwise, there would be a risk that the results are not taken into consideration because they are not considered relevant by those who will have to make the decisions.

			'''Presenter'''

			The presenter is the one who has the task of fueling the discussion, making suggestions and asking "why?". It is important that he has extensive knowledge of the project and is able to generate a productive brainstorming.

			'''Recorder'''

			His job is to write down all the ideas that come up during the session. Any information must be visible to other members. In case of using the Fishbone diagram to identify the root causes he will have to organize the information clearly to avoid misunderstandings.

	Presenter. The presenter is the one who has the task of fueling the discussion, making suggestions and asking "why?". It is important that he has extensive knowledge of the project and is able to generate a productive brainstorming.		'''Moderator'''

	~~Recorder. His job is to write down all~~ the ~~ideas that come up during~~ the ~~session~~. Any ~~information~~ must be ~~visible to other members~~. ~~In case~~ of ~~using the Fishbone diagram to identify the root causes he will have to organize~~ the ~~information clearly to avoid misunderstandings~~.		It has the role of maintaining the focus of the brainstorming inherent in the purpose of the pre-mortem analysis: identifying possible causes of failure. Any kind of misleading discussion or debate between two or more team members must be immediately appeased. It must mitigate the work of the Presenter.

	Moderator. It has the role of maintaining the focus of the brainstorming inherent in the purpose of the pre-mortem analysis: identifying possible causes of failure. Any kind of misleading discussion or debate between two or more team members must be immediately appeased. It must mitigate the work of the Presenter.		'''Participants'''

	~~Participant.~~ They need to find as many causes as possible and actively participate in brainstorming without being afraid to express any opinion. They can come from different sectors to ensure a broad view on all aspects of the project.		They need to find as many causes as possible and actively participate in brainstorming without being afraid to express any opinion. They can come from different sectors to ensure a broad view on all aspects of the project.

S202894 at 16:40, 28 February 2021

2021-02-28T16:40:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:40, 28 February 2021
Line 67:		Line 67:

	To make this process even more efficient it is useful to use an Ishikawa diagram, also known as a Fishbone diagram. This allows an immediate visualization of the problem and its causes, from the root causes to those arising from them.		To make this process even more efficient it is useful to use an Ishikawa diagram, also known as a Fishbone diagram. This allows an immediate visualization of the problem and its causes, from the root causes to those arising from them.

			===The main roles===

			To conduct a pre-mortem that is as effective as possible some key roles are recommended.
			These are the sponsor, presenter, recorder, moderator and participant.<ref name="R7" />

			'''Sponsor''' The sponsor must be represented by a high-ranking figure in the company. Someone who has decision-making power, so as to ensure that the evidence of the analysis is shared and accepted even at the managerial level. Otherwise, there would be a risk that the results are not taken into consideration because they are not considered relevant by those who will have to make the decisions.

			Presenter. The presenter is the one who has the task of fueling the discussion, making suggestions and asking "why?". It is important that he has extensive knowledge of the project and is able to generate a productive brainstorming.

			Recorder. His job is to write down all the ideas that come up during the session. Any information must be visible to other members. In case of using the Fishbone diagram to identify the root causes he will have to organize the information clearly to avoid misunderstandings.

			Moderator. It has the role of maintaining the focus of the brainstorming inherent in the purpose of the pre-mortem analysis: identifying possible causes of failure. Any kind of misleading discussion or debate between two or more team members must be immediately appeased. It must mitigate the work of the Presenter.

			Participant. They need to find as many causes as possible and actively participate in brainstorming without being afraid to express any opinion. They can come from different sectors to ensure a broad view on all aspects of the project.


	==Limitations==		==Limitations==