After Action Reviews Don't Work
After Action Reviews (AARs,) are powerful tools for driving continuous improvements, team performance, and even innovation breakthroughs—if done right.
But last week, a CEO told me her team's AARs are falling flat. Now people are resisting them. This wasn't the first time I've heard this.
She uses the "What's working?" "What could we improve?" "What action will we take?" format.
Common complaints:
Rehashing shortfalls or failures feels repetitive and draining.
Discussions are vague, overly empathetic, or turn into finger-pointing.
Conversations avoid tough topics like leadership effectiveness, team dynamics, and culture.
Takeaways don't produce sustainable or tangible results.
I've been there. My own team's reviews felt superficial and ineffective.
Then we started using Chris Argyris’ "double-loop learning."
The CEO quickly understood -- this is similar to the kind of "get underneath the hood" curiosity we bring to Vistage discussions.
Here's how to shift your AARs from frustrating and lacking value to impactful:
Quickly cover what happened - separate observable facts from explanations. Quantify the impact.
Identify patterns - if they reveal recurring issues, dig deeper.
Look at the practices, policies, processes, relationships, and decision-making reinforcing these patterns.
Explore internal forces - individual and collective beliefs, assumptions, biases, values, motivations, or perspectives that led to the contributing factors uncovered in step 3.
Decide what needs to change and commit to first steps.
Follow up.
Practice and build your AAR muscle. It's one of the most powerful and practical ways to accelerate learning, adjustments, and results.
Remember AARs are valuable for failures AND successes alike.
Where would a deep dive AAR be valuable in your organization?
A result you're repeatedly not happy with?
A project that's off track?
A strategic initiative that is completing a major milestone? - a big win?