Back مراجعة بعد العمل Arabic After Action Review German بررسی پس از اقدام Persian AAR HE AAR (військова справа) Ukrainian

After-action review

An after action review (AAR) is a technique for improving process and execution by analyzing the intended outcome and actual outcome of an action and identifying practices to sustain, and practices to improve or initiate, and then practicing those changes at the next iteration of the action[1][2] AARs in the formal sense were originally developed by the U.S. Army.[3] Formal AARs are used by all US military services and by many other non-US organizations.[4] Their use has extended to business as a knowledge management tool.[5]

An AAR occurs within a cycle of establishing the leader's intent, planning, preparation, action and review.[6] An AAR is distinct from a de-brief in that it begins with a clear comparison of intended versus actual results achieved.[1] An AAR is forward-looking, with the goal of informing future planning, preparation, and execution of similar actions. Assigning blame or issuing reprimands is antithetical to the purpose of an AAR. An AAR is distinct from a post-mortem in its tight focus on participants' own actions; learning from the review is taken forward by the participants.[7] Recommendations for others are not produced. AARs in larger operations can be cascaded in order to keep each level of the organization focused on its own performance within a particular event or project.[7]

Formal AAR meetings are normally run by a facilitator or trained 'AAR Conductor', and can be chronological reviews or tightly focused on a few key issues selected by the team leader.[7] Short cycle informal AARs are typically run by a team leader or assistant and are very quick.[7]

  1. ^ a b Cronin, Gerard; Andrews, Steven (2 June 2009). "After action reviews: a new model for learning: Gerard Cronin and Steven Andrews explain why after action reviews are an ideal model for healthcare professionals to analyse and learn from events". Emergency Nurse. 17 (3): 32–35. doi:10.7748/en2009.06.17.3.32.c7090. PMID 19552332. ProQuest 218273304.
  2. ^ Darling, Marilyn; Parry, Charles; Moore, Joseph (July 2005). "Learning in the Thick of Learning in the Thick of It". Retrieved 1 October 2022.
  3. ^ Morrison, John E.; Meliza, Larry L. (1 July 1999). "Foundations of the After Action Review Process". DTIC ADA368651. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  4. ^ Sawyer, Taylor Lee; Deering, Shad (December 2013). "Adaptation of the US Army's After-Action Review for Simulation Debriefing in Healthcare". Simulation in Healthcare. 8 (6): 388–397. doi:10.1097/SIH.0b013e31829ac85c. PMID 24096913. S2CID 35341227.
  5. ^ Levy, Moria (19 July 2011). "Knowledge retention: minimizing organizational business loss". Journal of Knowledge Management. 15 (4): 582–600. doi:10.1108/13673271111151974.
  6. ^ Baird, Lloyd; Holland, Phil; Deacon, Sandra (March 1999). "Learning from action: Imbedding more learning into the performance fast enough to make a difference". Organizational Dynamics. 27 (4): 19–32. doi:10.1016/S0090-2616(99)90027-X.
  7. ^ a b c d Beatty, Carol Anne (2016). "The How of Change". Managing Change: The Easy, Hard and Tough Work. ISBN 978-0-88886-568-7.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia · View on Wikipedia

Developed by Nelliwinne