Difference between revisions of "AFTER ACTION REVIEW"

Difference between revisions of "AFTER ACTION REVIEW"

From Learning and training wiki

Share/Save/Bookmark
Jump to: navigation, search
(Removing all content from page)
 
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<table width="100%" style="border:1px solid #D87A35;background-color: white;" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tr style="background-color:#D87A35"><td colspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid #D87A35;">[[Image:Toolkit.png‎]] &nbsp;<b><font color="white" size="4">AFTER ACTION REVIEW</font></b></td></tr><tr><td width="100"valign="top">
 
  
Steps for an after action review: <ref> [http://www.odi.org.uk www.odi.org.uk] (18 August 2008), [http://www.w3j.com] (21 July 2008), [http://www.daretoshare.ch www.daretoshare.ch] (18 August 2008), [http://www.nlink.com www.nlink.com] (18 August 2008), [http://www.waterisac.org/epa www.waterisac.org/epa] (18 August 2008), </ref>
 
 
{| style="border:1px solid #D87A35;background:#D87A35;" 
 
|-
 
! width= "300pt" | <font color= "white"> Charasteristics  </font>
 
! width= "700pt" | <font color= white> Content </font>
 
|- style="border:1px solid #D87A35;background:white;color:black;" 
 
 
| ''' Definition'''
 
 
| [[After Action Review|After Action Review]].
 
 
|- style="border:1px solid #D87A35;background:white;color:black;" 
 
|'''Steps'''||
 
*Invite the right people-Appoint a facilitator-Create the right climate
 
*Define the meeting objectives and deliverables of the project
 
*Define what was supposed to happen in the project
 
*Resume what actually happened, what went well and why?
 
*Define what could have gone better and share learning advices for the future
 
*Ensure every participant in the meeting is fully heard before leaving the meeting
 
*Record and share important lessons learnt
 
|- style="border:1px solid #D87A35;background:white;color:black;" 
 
|'''[[Facilitator|Facilitator]] role''' || '''Leadership role'''
 
*To focus on providing a direction to the group when the leader fails to fulfill their role
 
*To stimulate and encourage constructive debate between group members
 
*To support members of the group, helping them to bring information, and to build new ideas
 
*To participate when the group is interacting poorly or in the wrong direction, by promoting new discussion
 
*To promote team building in a cohesive, interactive, and productive way
 
 
'''Referee role'''
 
*To regulate and maintain order of the group discussion, discouraging participants from talking at the same time
 
*To protect members, and ensure that all contributions to the discussion are treated equally
 
*To deal with problems, and to control people within the group, allowing everyone to participate freely
 
*To manage the time, and adhere to the meeting timetable ensuring completion of the agenda
 
 
'''Neutral role'''
 
*The facilitator is neutral, and pragmatic, because he takes a detached look at the discussion
 
*He encourages feedback, to promote discussion of each point of the meeting
 
 
|- style="border:1px solid #D87A35;background:white;color:black;" 
 
|}
 
 
 
 
 
== References ==
 
<references/>
 

Latest revision as of 13:45, 18 August 2008