Difference between revisions of "After Action Review"
From Learning and training wiki
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Term|AFTER ACTION REVIEW (AAR)|Briefing or analysis following the completion of an activity to allow employees and leaders to see whether anything could have or should have been done differently. It is a process developed to help teams to learn quickly from their successes ([[Good Practices|good practices]]) and failures ([[Lessons Learned|lessons learned]]) and share their learning with other teams. It should be performed after each identifiable event or milestone and become a live learning process. It involves conducting a professional, structured and facilitated discussion after a task or project has been completed to review what should have happened, what actually happened and why it happened; this allows participants to learn how to sustain strengths and improve on weaknesses in subsequent tasks or projects.<ref> [http://betterevaluation.org/evaluation-options/after_action_review http://betterevaluation.org/evaluation-options/after_action_review], [http://www.kstoolkit.org/After+Action+Review http://www.kstoolkit.org/After+Action+Review], [http://www.sdc-learningandnetworking.ch/en/Home/SDC_KM_Tools/After_Action_Review_AAR http://www.sdc-learningandnetworking.ch/en/Home/SDC_KM_Tools/After_Action_Review_AAR]</ref> | {{Term|AFTER ACTION REVIEW (AAR)|Briefing or analysis following the completion of an activity to allow employees and leaders to see whether anything could have or should have been done differently. It is a process developed to help teams to learn quickly from their successes ([[Good Practices|good practices]]) and failures ([[Lessons Learned|lessons learned]]) and share their learning with other teams. It should be performed after each identifiable event or milestone and become a live learning process. It involves conducting a professional, structured and facilitated discussion after a task or project has been completed to review what should have happened, what actually happened and why it happened; this allows participants to learn how to sustain strengths and improve on weaknesses in subsequent tasks or projects.<ref> [http://betterevaluation.org/evaluation-options/after_action_review http://betterevaluation.org/evaluation-options/after_action_review], [http://www.kstoolkit.org/After+Action+Review http://www.kstoolkit.org/After+Action+Review], [http://www.sdc-learningandnetworking.ch/en/Home/SDC_KM_Tools/After_Action_Review_AAR http://www.sdc-learningandnetworking.ch/en/Home/SDC_KM_Tools/After_Action_Review_AAR]</ref> | ||
+ | |||
See also: [[Action Review]] }} | See also: [[Action Review]] }} | ||
Line 55: | Line 56: | ||
'''Neutral role''' | '''Neutral role''' | ||
*The facilitator is neutral, and pragmatic, because he takes a detached look at the discussion | *The facilitator is neutral, and pragmatic, because he takes a detached look at the discussion | ||
− | *He encourages feedback, promoting discussion of each point of the meeting<ref>[http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadf360.pdf http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadf360.pdf], USAID, AAR Guide, 2006</ref> | + | *He encourages feedback, promoting discussion of each point of the meeting<ref>[http://www.click4it.org/images/d/d2/Organizing_an_After_Action_Review.pdf http://www.click4it.org/images/d/d2/Organizing_an_After_Action_Review.pdf], UNITAR Guide, [http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadf360.pdf http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadf360.pdf], USAID, AAR Guide, 2006</ref> |
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 20:30, 30 December 2014
AFTER ACTION REVIEW (AAR) |
Briefing or analysis following the completion of an activity to allow employees and leaders to see whether anything could have or should have been done differently. It is a process developed to help teams to learn quickly from their successes (good practices) and failures (lessons learned) and share their learning with other teams. It should be performed after each identifiable event or milestone and become a live learning process. It involves conducting a professional, structured and facilitated discussion after a task or project has been completed to review what should have happened, what actually happened and why it happened; this allows participants to learn how to sustain strengths and improve on weaknesses in subsequent tasks or projects.[1] See also: Action Review |
Organizing an After Action Review |
Step by StepBefore the Meeting
During the Meeting
After the Meeting
Facilitator's RoleThe facilitator plays three main roles:
|
Job Aid
Organizing an After Action Review
Web Resources |
Link | Content |
---|---|
After Action Reviews and Retrospects | This one-pager published by FAO clearly explains what an AAR is and gives you useful tips! |
After-Action Review Technical Guidance | This is a Guide published by USAID with all you need to know about an AAR. |
AAR outline | This AAR outline displays the benefits of conducting an AAR. |
Intro to AAR | Here are the key points of an AAR. |
References
- ↑ http://betterevaluation.org/evaluation-options/after_action_review, http://www.kstoolkit.org/After+Action+Review, http://www.sdc-learningandnetworking.ch/en/Home/SDC_KM_Tools/After_Action_Review_AAR
- ↑ http://www.click4it.org/images/d/d2/Organizing_an_After_Action_Review.pdf, UNITAR Guide, http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadf360.pdf, USAID, AAR Guide, 2006