Implementing after-action review systems in organizations: Key principles and practical considerations

Cliff Scott, Alexandra M. Dunn, Eleanor B. Williams, Joseph A. Allen

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Actors in high-reliability organizations often form meetings to discuss incidents and learn from them. Such after-action reviews (AARs) are structured opportunities for shared retrospective learning, innovation development, and continuous improvement. Research on AARs has examined the meeting-level antecedents and outcomes associated with various elements of AARs, but has generally stopped short of considering how they should influence and respond to the organizations in which they are situated. After connecting the functions of AARs using the theoretical frameworks of collective sensemaking, organizational learning, and knowledge management, this chapter presents an input-process-output model of AAR systems that accounts for a range of extra-meeting factors that influence and are influenced by the content of retrospective discussion. It also describes best practices and directions for future research associated with these inputs, processes, and outputs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationThe Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages634-659
Number of pages26
ISBN (Electronic)9781107589735
ISBN (Print)9781107067189
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

After action review
Continuous improvement
Influence factors
Innovation
High reliability organizations
Theoretical framework
Best practice
Organizational knowledge
Organization form
Incidents
Sensemaking
Organizational learning
Knowledge management

Keywords

  • After-action reviews
  • Group discussion
  • Group learning
  • Input-process-output models
  • Meeting facilitation
  • Organizational knowledge management
  • Postmortems
  • Sensemaking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)
  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)

Cite this

Scott, C., Dunn, A. M., Williams, E. B., & Allen, J. A. (2015). Implementing after-action review systems in organizations: Key principles and practical considerations. In The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science (pp. 634-659). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589735.027

Implementing after-action review systems in organizations : Key principles and practical considerations. / Scott, Cliff; Dunn, Alexandra M.; Williams, Eleanor B.; Allen, Joseph A.

The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge University Press, 2015. p. 634-659.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Scott, C, Dunn, AM, Williams, EB & Allen, JA 2015, Implementing after-action review systems in organizations: Key principles and practical considerations. in The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge University Press, pp. 634-659. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589735.027
Scott C, Dunn AM, Williams EB, Allen JA. Implementing after-action review systems in organizations: Key principles and practical considerations. In The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge University Press. 2015. p. 634-659 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589735.027
Scott, Cliff ; Dunn, Alexandra M. ; Williams, Eleanor B. ; Allen, Joseph A. / Implementing after-action review systems in organizations : Key principles and practical considerations. The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge University Press, 2015. pp. 634-659
@inbook{22389937c3d84903a9189d353647caf6,
title = "Implementing after-action review systems in organizations: Key principles and practical considerations",
abstract = "Actors in high-reliability organizations often form meetings to discuss incidents and learn from them. Such after-action reviews (AARs) are structured opportunities for shared retrospective learning, innovation development, and continuous improvement. Research on AARs has examined the meeting-level antecedents and outcomes associated with various elements of AARs, but has generally stopped short of considering how they should influence and respond to the organizations in which they are situated. After connecting the functions of AARs using the theoretical frameworks of collective sensemaking, organizational learning, and knowledge management, this chapter presents an input-process-output model of AAR systems that accounts for a range of extra-meeting factors that influence and are influenced by the content of retrospective discussion. It also describes best practices and directions for future research associated with these inputs, processes, and outputs.",
keywords = "After-action reviews, Group discussion, Group learning, Input-process-output models, Meeting facilitation, Organizational knowledge management, Postmortems, Sensemaking",
author = "Cliff Scott and Dunn, {Alexandra M.} and Williams, {Eleanor B.} and Allen, {Joseph A.}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/CBO9781107589735.027",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9781107067189",
pages = "634--659",
booktitle = "The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Implementing after-action review systems in organizations

T2 - Key principles and practical considerations

AU - Scott, Cliff

AU - Dunn, Alexandra M.

AU - Williams, Eleanor B.

AU - Allen, Joseph A.

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Actors in high-reliability organizations often form meetings to discuss incidents and learn from them. Such after-action reviews (AARs) are structured opportunities for shared retrospective learning, innovation development, and continuous improvement. Research on AARs has examined the meeting-level antecedents and outcomes associated with various elements of AARs, but has generally stopped short of considering how they should influence and respond to the organizations in which they are situated. After connecting the functions of AARs using the theoretical frameworks of collective sensemaking, organizational learning, and knowledge management, this chapter presents an input-process-output model of AAR systems that accounts for a range of extra-meeting factors that influence and are influenced by the content of retrospective discussion. It also describes best practices and directions for future research associated with these inputs, processes, and outputs.

AB - Actors in high-reliability organizations often form meetings to discuss incidents and learn from them. Such after-action reviews (AARs) are structured opportunities for shared retrospective learning, innovation development, and continuous improvement. Research on AARs has examined the meeting-level antecedents and outcomes associated with various elements of AARs, but has generally stopped short of considering how they should influence and respond to the organizations in which they are situated. After connecting the functions of AARs using the theoretical frameworks of collective sensemaking, organizational learning, and knowledge management, this chapter presents an input-process-output model of AAR systems that accounts for a range of extra-meeting factors that influence and are influenced by the content of retrospective discussion. It also describes best practices and directions for future research associated with these inputs, processes, and outputs.

KW - After-action reviews

KW - Group discussion

KW - Group learning

KW - Input-process-output models

KW - Meeting facilitation

KW - Organizational knowledge management

KW - Postmortems

KW - Sensemaking

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84954242629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84954242629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9781107589735.027

DO - 10.1017/CBO9781107589735.027

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84954242629

SN - 9781107067189

SP - 634

EP - 659

BT - The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science

PB - Cambridge University Press

ER -