Lessons Learned Guidelines: Plan Requirements Design Build Test Train/Deploy Maintenance Solution Analysis
Lessons Learned Guidelines: Plan Requirements Design Build Test Train/Deploy Maintenance Solution Analysis
TO THE DOCUMENT OWNER: This template is provided as a guideline and resource. The structure and instructions
give detail about what might go into a completed document. Only you and your team, however, know what will
best fit the needs of your specific effort, and you are encouraged to adapt the template as appropriate to meet
those needs.
Process
The lessons learned process should include the following steps:
Each of the steps will be described further below. The identification and completion of action items is a
key element to improving processes within an organization. Without this work, valuable feedback may
be lost and the effectiveness of lessons learned reviews may be questioned by participants.
Page 1
of 5
o A lessons learned discussion should occur no more than 2 weeks after the end of a
project, the occurrence of an outage or other event, etc. Memory of the details
associated with a specific event or effort is quickly diminished by other day-to-day
activities. It is important to engage the participants soon after the event in order to
obtain the best feedback. This is also an argument for reviewing lessons from the early
stages of a project separately from the review at the end of the project; by the project's
end, recollection of the planning and requirements processes, for example, may be less
distinct and/or overshadowed by later work on the project.
o This provides two primary benefits. The first is that everyone involved in the event has
the opportunity to offer feedback; doing so can be difficult or distracting while also
recording input from the rest of the team. The second is encouragement of all
perspectives. When someone who was involved in the effort leads the discussion
and/or transcribes the feedback, that person may impose his/her own views of the
event on the feedback, which can result in unintended interpretations, phrasing, and
even omission of feedback. A more problematic situation may also occur if the
facilitator responds to or defends feedback from the team rather than acknowledging
and recording it.
o Many of the most important lessons can be gained from critical feedback, and
participants in the discussion should be encouraged to share thoughts on how the effort
was unsuccessful as well as on how it went smoothly. The facilitator should begin the
session by setting ground rules, which include guidelines such as no personal attacks,
openness to all opinions and perspectives, and agreement to share thoughts openly in
the session paired with limiting certain feedback to the confines of the group. This sort
of preparation makes it easier for those involved to speak freely.
o While it is traditional practice to gather feedback from the members of a project team, it
can be equally useful to collect input from an effort's customers or those who were
impacted by the effort, as well as from other groups who may have been more loosely
involved in the effort. These people can have a great influence on the success of a
project or other effort, and they will often have a different perspective to offer.
Including them in the lessons learned effort may provide important information. At the
same time, it may be best to gather feedback from these groups separately from the
project team session or even to use a different method for input. The details of who
should be included and how their feedback should be elicited may be determined on a
case by case basis.
o The purpose of a lessons learned session is not to allow those involved in the effort to
gripe but rather to identify the root cause of elements that went well and that went
o A group usually needs about an hour to share its thoughts on successes and failures.
More time may be required for a particularly large, complicated, or disastrous effort, in
which case it may be wise to divide the feedback sessions into smaller parts rather than
to schedule a single, long session. If the group is to continue to the next step in the
process, the prioritization of issues or the identification of specific action items, this may
also require a longer session. To ensure that the discussion not linger too long on a
particular topic, it is helpful for the facilitator to have a rough outline of the discussion in
mind, with times assigned so that s/he may move the group along at a pace that will
allow time for all questions.
o Feedback comments will often cluster around certain themes or topics, which tends to
indicate more significant problem areas. Categorizing or grouping the comments may
help with the identification of root causes or of broader issues, as well as with
prioritizing future actions.
o Because feedback items often relate to issues which are best addressed at the
managerial level, it is important to involve the manager(s) for the service and/or team
members in the review of feedback and identification of action items. A manager may
be able to recognize trends which extend beyond the effort as well as to identify higher-
level actions than may be suggested by participants in the effort. Additionally, the
inclusion of relevant manager(s) improves accountability and oversight.
o The involvement of multiple people increases accountability, divides the effort for
quicker follow-through, and reduces the burden upon a single individual. If the full set
of action items is left to a single person, it is unlikely to be completed due to conflicting
priorities, lack of interest, and lack of assistance when something goes awry.
Assignment to a group speeds the completion and thus the impact on future efforts.
o Check-in points encourage progress to be made, hold assignees accountable for due
dates, and allow discussion of any issues which may arise. Check-ins should be
scheduled so long as any items are outstanding.