|
@shreyas | |||||
|
Twitter, now that we understand why the preventable problem paradox is so prevalent and pernicious, it’s time to talk about combating it.
So, as promised, here’s a thread on pre-mortems. pic.twitter.com/DZm5MhDVu1
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
In this thread, we’ll look at the “what” and “how” of pre-mortems, along with a novel technique of using “Tigers”, “Paper Tigers”, and “Elephants” to run effective pre-mortems. pic.twitter.com/AL2sT6yqav
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
But first, ICYMI, check out the thread linked below.
While I knew that thread would resonate with some, it got way more popular than I had imagined.
It seemed to especially strike a chord with folks in security, sysadmin, privacy, and related areas.
twitter.com/shreyas/status…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
And many of you shared (both publicly and in private) how it clarified some of the organizational dysfunctions you’ve seen over your careers.
This Tweet is quite relevant:
twitter.com/shreyas/status…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
With that, let’s talk about a specific technique to help you do what’s right for your customers, your company, your team, by foreshadowing and mitigating the most blatant would-be blunders.
That technique is pre-mortems.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
It is one of 3-4 mitigations for the preventable problem paradox.
It is also the most practicable one.
You can literally implement this on Monday if you want.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Post-mortems, after action reviews (AARs), etc. are becoming a part of the “standard process” at many organizations.
(and I think that is great!)
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
So, what’s a pre-mortem? pic.twitter.com/lzKwfpL8As
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Note: you can (and likely should) do a post-mortem anyway, even if the project went quite well.
But, moving along.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Unlike a post-mortem—where you discuss what went wrong (and what you can learn from it)—in a pre-mortem, you get together earlier in a project’s lifecycle and ask the team to assume that the project has failed.
And you prompt the team to come up with the reasons why.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
This short and excellent HBR article by @KleInsight is required reading on this topic.
hbr.org/2007/09/perfor…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Here are the highlights of the standard pre-mortem process: pic.twitter.com/flCQj5W9lb
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
I’ll now share a modified pre-mortem script that has worked well on the teams I’ve worked with.
As background, at Stripe, the teams I’ve led have regularly run pre-mortems for our products, particularly major product launches (e.g. Stripe Connect, Stripe Terminal).
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
And while we haven’t been 100% mistake-free, pre-mortems have enabled “calm product launches” and enhanced team productivity & morale.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Why change the standard pre-mortem script?
In my experience, the standard pre-mortem meeting was very engaging *while* the team was in the room.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
But how many times have you had an engaging meeting and then people leave the room and everybody forgets about it and reverts to old patterns?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
That’s what I saw repeatedly when we employed the standard script.
So, I began looking for ways to change that.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
I wanted the team to
A. be spotting major problems, and
B. surface those problems up to other team members
*throughout the lifecycle of the project*,
not just at that one pre-mortem meeting.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
What was missing, I realized, was an evocative, convenient lexicon that allowed people to talk about these things in a psychologically safe manner.
Related: I learned quite late in my career the tremendous benefits of giving your team a context-specific lexicon. Don’t be me.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Enter the metaphors:
Tigers
Paper Tigers
Elephants
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
The way I like to run pre-mortems now is to ask them to list out their concerns about the project in 3 different categories:
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Paper Tiger pic.twitter.com/clQ2pC9cHX
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Why are you not worried about a Paper Tiger (even though others might be)?
Usually because you’re responsible for the said area and have strong conviction that the ostensible Tiger is fully under control.
You’ve got it!
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
Elephant pic.twitter.com/dEQgaNOTKt
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
An Elephant might not be a threat per se, but it’s the thing you’re worried no one is talking about.
It’s the “elephant in the room”.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
So, with this lexicon, here’s how I recommend running a pre-mortem meeting:
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
It’s 1 hour long and the flow looks like this: pic.twitter.com/a1emmbkH0M
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
During the context setting part, I introduce the pre-mortem concept (it’s always *someone’s* first pre-mortem) and ask everyone on the team to come up with:
2 Tigers (at least), and
any Paper Tigers and Elephants they can think of.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
There is absolutely no talking during this time.
Quiet time!
It’s amazing how long & productive a 10 minute stretch of silence can be in a meeting, when no one is talking.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Shreyas Doshi
@shreyas
|
26. sij |
|
After that, there’s another 10 minutes of Quiet time.
During this time, people read everyone else’s Tigers, Paper Tigers, and Elephants.
And they get to +1 others’ Tigers, Paper Tigers, and Elephants. Each person can give up to five +1s. So you need to be quite selective. pic.twitter.com/k2oSHFr9hy
|
||
|
|
||