Just because the outcome of a business project or strategic initiative is acceptable doesn’t mean the road getting there was smooth, which is why many companies conduct a ‘lessons learned’ or ‘post-mortem’ to examine what went well, what didn’t go well, and what could be done differently.
Hindsight is 20/20 as the saying goes…
This is undoubtedly true, but wouldn’t it be nice to look out the front windshield instead of the rear-view mirror? After all, isn’t that what robust ERM is supposed to be doing anyway?
Learning from failure is good, but wouldn’t it be nice to do that without the actual failures?
Thankfully, there’s one tool that enables you and your company to do this when it comes to projects – the premortem. While I’m well-familiar with the postmortem/lessons learned concept (and have conducted many of them over the last decade-plus), I learned about the premortem tool during an academic study by Gareth Byatt where I was a participant.
Through a combination of resources that we’ll link to below, this article is an in-depth exploration of the premortem method using “5 Ws and H” technique originally developed by journalists. Note that the following are NOT listed in the order of the moniker itself.
Let’s dig into the details of this particular tool and how you can use it to help your company refine project plans to ensure a smooth(er) ride and ultimately success.
Q1: What is a premortem?
The concept of a premortem is relatively simple…
A project or initiative has been chosen, but before any work begins, the premortem asks participants to assume that the effort has failed. And not just failed a little…failed spectacularly. Next, participants are asked to take a few minutes and write down any reason that would lead to this type of disastrous conclusion.
The potential for these things to happen are the risks to the project. From here, triggers and root causes can be identified, and plans developed to mitigate or accept the risks should they occur. A premortem results in a much stronger plan for the project itself.
Think of it as a risk identification method, but it’s all about timing (before you start the project) and the questions you are asking.
The method was developed by cognitive psychologist Gary Klein, who contrasts the premortem with standard critiquing in this HBR piece:
Unlike a typical critiquing session, in which project team members are asked what might go wrong, the premortem operates on the assumption that the “patient” has died, and so asks what did go wrong. The team members’ task is to generate plausible reasons for the project’s failure.
In addition to the premortem, which asks participants to visualize a complete failure, Klein developed a companion “ProMortem” that gazes into a future where a project is wildly successful.
Q2: Why would a company want to conduct a project premortem?
It’s no secret that many projects end up in failure, or at least come in way over budget or extremely late.
It’s sad but true…
With ever increasing uncertainty, companies need a way to ensure their projects are successful. Premortem is one such method, and in my opinion, can and should be used for business process changes as well.
Research from 1989 showed that prospective hindsight, or imagining that a bad event has already occurred, increases the ability to identify reasons for future outcomes by 30%. It’s this ‘prospective hindsight’ that Dr. Klein used to develop the premortem method.
According to Klein, other reasons why companies may want to do a premortem is that it can potentially eliminate the need for a painful postmortem, plus it puts the team on alert for early signs of trouble now that they are more aware of what could go wrong. Besides helping teams identify potential problems before they occur, it also reduces a cavalier attitude some people have about projects.
This is yet another example of being proactive, which is a key point we discuss in our cornerstone article on traditional vs. enterprise risk management.
Another reason or benefit raised by Denise Sobczak and Michael Zuraw in a RIMS podcast on premortems is that doing one eliminates or dramatically reduces common biases such as groupthink and confirmation bias.
Q3: When should a project premortem be done?
There really is no set standard or frequency to conducting a premortem.
However, there are circumstances where they are most useful according to Sobczak and Zuraw, and that is when there are a lot of cross-functional initiatives with interdependencies. Complex situations like this end up generating a lot of risks and potential tripwires to successfully completing a project.
Both maintain that the premortem can also be used for strategic decisions.
Besides complex projects and strategic decisions, another opportunity to use a premortem is for major changes in a business process. There have been numerous times I’ve seen companies implementing a new software system and run into major problems that would have been avoided if they had simply taken a little bit of time to understand process dependencies and risks, whether it’s using a premortem or some other tool.
It’s a classic example of slowing down to go faster.
Q4: Who should lead and participate in a premortem?
Again, there is no set standard. Much of the answer to this question will boil down to the culture of your organization.
But to keep things on track, it’s important for a premortem to be led by a skilled facilitator explains Gareth Byatt, which of course is a natural role for an ERM professional.
When it comes to participants, that’s really dependent on the project or subject of the premortem, but there are a few general principles Sobczak and Zuraw share besides including those directly involved in the project or initiative, such as:
- Involve individuals with experience with failures.
- Invite newcomers to the organization.
- Avoid including top executives because they will dominate any discussions and possibly discourage other participants from speaking up.
- Encourage middle management to ask the tough questions (like “what if the planners are wrong?”) since they have the best view of the company’s culture and know enough to be able to ask those questions.
- (Maybe) invite people from other areas not directly involved with the project but who could be impacted or play a role (e.g., legal, financial, business support, IT).
The common theme between all these tips is to obtain the most diverse range of perspectives while also challenging the assumptions of those who chose the project(s) or set the goal(s) in question.
And as far as numbers are concerned, in-person sessions will be able accommodate more than virtual ones, or around 10-15 and 8-10, respectively. The right number really should reflect a balance between everyone having a say and the range of perspectives.
Q5: How should a premortem be done?
The heart of this question is answered above in Q1.
But expanding on that answer a little more, the overall answer is that it depends…on the organization’s culture.
An informal session can be efficient and quick, and for some projects, that’s all you will really need. Some companies with strict governance structures may require some more formality, such as a uniform process or using single facilitator like the ERM leader or business continuity manager (someone with no skin in the game).
Gareth Byatt suggests the process should last anywhere from 45 minutes to two hours depending on the depth of the discussion.
Any approach should ultimately bridge the gap between being a naysayer and a contributor.
Any premortem should follow the basic structure, which consists of 1) assume failure or success, 2) identify triggers for these to occur, and 3) develop plans or adjusting the project or decision.
There really is no right or wrong answer when it comes to the “how” as long as you meet the goal: identify triggers to why a project or decision could catastrophically fail (…or succeed) and subsequently analyze and prioritize them, so any approach you take should “…typically a review of potential outcomes and mapping back to potential trigger points, and actions agreed on how to spot those trigger points,” states Gareth.
Q6: Where can I learn more?
The resources I’ve mentioned throughout this article are some great options for learning more. These include an interview with Dr. Klein and Powerpoint by Gareth Byatt. The RIMS podcast with Sobczak and Zuraw has additional insights I’ve not included here, and if you’re a member of RIMS, you can access their full white paper on premortems.
Dr. Klein also has his website where he features his work, plus this HBR article where he introduces the premortem.
Final Thoughts on Premortems
In a way, a premortem is like a targeted scenario analysis.
Like the Hedgehog concept, the Bowtie, PESTEL analysis, signpost analysis, and others we’ve written about, the premortem is another tool for helping the company understand what could get in the way of successfully achieving a desired outcome.
It is not meant to add another step, but an option.
It’s another way ERM can help the company go beyond compliance with regulations and averting failure, but successfully navigate the inevitable landmines that frustrate the best laid plans and ensure a successful outcome.
Have you ever used a premortem or some other tool for helping the company ensure projects are successful?
To share your thoughts on this or other methods you have found useful, please join the conversation on LinkedIn.
It can be difficult to know where to start, especially if your experience with ERM is focused solely on preventing failure. To begin using tools like this and others designed for ensuring your company’s success, please reach out to discuss your specific company’s specific situation, culture, and more.
