Effective post-crisis debrief

In the midst of every crisis lies a great opportunity! Indeed, companies and governments alike are discovering in real-time the effectiveness of—and gaps in—their crisis management plans.

The days and weeks after a crisis end can provide leaders with a unique opportunity to identify the organization’s strengths that should be sustained or built upon and weaknesses that require improvement.

As I got to learn from a free webinar by Corporate Compliance Insights recently, (Psst: There is a sudden rise in free webinars all over. Take advantage) these post-crisis debriefs is where policies, decisions, and implementation can be reconstructed and analyzed to determine what was done right, what was done wrong and what could be done better the next time (even if the next threat vector is different).

Effective debrief

Debriefing after a major crisis is a challenge. Critically, a senior leader like the CEO must clearly articulate the value of this effort, stressing what the process is meant to accomplish.

Participants need to understand that the post-crisis review is not intended to critique or grade success or failure. Instead, the process is meant to be a candid discussion and analysis of the organization’s actual performance during the crisis, either in keeping with or diverting from the established crisis plan.

To be most effective, all participants must contribute to insights, observations, and questions without fear of critique or retaliation. The findings from a post-crisis review should not be used in performance evaluations, so participants should feel comfortable self-identifying the mistakes they made as well as those made by others across the organization. Ultimately, the evaluation should skew toward results-oriented solutions that identify options and conditions that the organization can successfully leverage in future crises

Root-cause analysis

Once the ground rules have been established, organizations should conduct a baseline analysis. At the outset, team members should individually answer a series of key questions before reviewing them as a group, including:

• Did we have a crisis plan in place? If not, why not? If yes, was it helpful or why was it not useful in this situation?
• Did we stick to the plan or did we improvise?
• What caused this variance?
• Did our response have the necessary flexibility to accommodate a crisis situation as it continued to evolve?
• If they were similarly affected, what did others in our industry do in response to the crisis, and what can we learn from their actions?
• What are the takeaways and lessons learned that can help inform the company’s crisis strategy and contingency planning for the future?

Honestly assess accountability

For the organization’s long-term success, it is critical to embrace accountability during debriefing. Everyone, from the organization’s senior leaders to junior staff, must be candid about their decisions and actions. It is important for every participant to understand that accountability during this review is about individuals assuming personal responsibility for the results of their choices.

Rather than assigning blame or punishment, the organization should foster a constructive environment in which the team seeks solutions to any issues it encountered.  The goal of this approach is to prevent mistakes from being repeated and to change the organization’s crisis management plan by incorporating lessons learned.

Uncomfortable discussions

Recognizing that conversations during post-crisis evaluations may be ill-tempered, participants must check their egos (and their organizational rank) at the door. They must recognize that the uneasiness that comes with having their decisions and actions reviewed is minor when compared to the peril of repeating sub-optimal practices during future crises. Every person or action is subject to the same scrutiny, regardless of hierarchy or job function.

Employees’ willingness and ability to openly discuss pitfalls in performance is driven by the commitment of senior leadership to create, emphasize, and embrace a culture of commitment to accountability.

While it is wise to use discretion and be respectful of senior leaders, casually handling their inadequacies robs the organization of important feedback. Even the most seasoned executives can benefit from learning how their decisions and actions influenced the organization’s crisis response. When senior management make themselves vulnerable and own their personal decisions and actions, it encourages other participants to do so as well.

Debrief is not about making excuses

Each participant in debriefs must be prepared to accept praise and criticism, with equal interest in absorbing both. In the end, it is about organizational improvement and is not personal. The goal is to create and foster a learning environment, and not point fingers or make excuses. An effective debrief is centered on the specific performance of the organization’s leaders, including vertical and horizontal teamwork. It should not be the venue for defensive behavior or justification for poor performance.

Mediator

To foster greater accountability and help control some emotions in the assessment process, organizations may wish to have an external facilitator assist with the formal review conversations. Constructive feedback and recommendations for improved performance may be misread as finger-pointing if the individual whose performance is being discussed perceives that their superiors are dissatisfied or annoyed with their performance.

If others sense the tension in the room, it may discourage them from being forthcoming, reducing the ability to identify and solve problems and incorporate lessons learned.