How should an after-action review (AAR) be conducted?

• A. Only collect quantitative data without discussion
• B. Promptly after an event, collect facts, determine what worked and what didn’t, extract lessons learned, and assign follow-up actions
• C. Place blame on individuals and close the issue
• D. Conduct months later during informal debrief

Answer: (B)

An AAR is a structured, timely debrief that turns experience into actionable improvements. It should be done promptly after an event so memories are fresh and the discussion stays focused on learning rather than assigning fault. In the session, you gather the facts and then analyze what happened: what went as planned, what didn’t, and why those results occurred. The aim is to pull lessons learned and translate them into concrete follow-up actions with clear owners and deadlines, so changes can be implemented and future performance improves.

Collecting only quantitative data without discussion misses context and the opportunity to understand decisions and actions. Blaming individuals shifts the focus from learning to punishment, which erodes honesty and collaboration. Waiting for months and conducting an informal debrief reduces the accuracy of recollections, diminishes accountability, and makes it harder to implement timely improvements.