These are all good tips, and following them will likely lead to an insightful report. But while there are many tips for writing a good incident report, very few tell you how to Latest Mailing Database facilitate the critical meeting where that report is evaluated and discussed. Ask five key questions Previously, we asked a set of five questions during incident reviews at Intercom: Do we know what happened? Are we confident about how we detected this incident? Was it easy and straightforward to ease, rather than hard and slow? Do we understand what to remember, i.e. lessons learned? Are we confident that we can prevent this from happening again? Each question has been designed to facilitate discussion. If we weren't confident, why not? What could we do better? What could our systems do better.
If we were confident, what did we do well? How would we apply this to the rest of the organization? The questions were oriented to encourage a growth mindset and push us to Latest Mailing Database learn and improve. In reality, however, that is not what the questions did. Although we made it clear at the start of each meeting that blame was neither constructive nor welcome, the five-question format left presenters feeling judged. They were in the hot seat, at the mercy of anyone with a question. This made the exam a high-pressure and isolating experience for the presenting engineer. It's hard to learn when you, or others around you, don't feel safe. Lessons and takeaways weren't clear enough Another problem with the format was that it didn't create natural openings in the conversation for other engineers to step in. By focusing on a single event with defined issues, we often overlooked commonalities and patterns between incidents.
This made it difficult for other engineers to understand what they could take away from these meetings and how the lessons could apply to themselves and their team. The result was a slow and often unproductive meeting where the facilitator tried to draw ideas from a reluctant guest. Teams became increasingly reluctant to engage in the review process and meeting attendance declined. “We wanted to Latest Mailing Database open the conversation, encourage open dialogue and collective learning” Experiment with the meeting format Not only was this meeting hard to navigate for the engineers, it was incredibly difficult to moderate. So we decided to start experimenting. We looked at the main improvements we wanted to see: We wanted everyone to feel really safe. We wanted to open the conversation, encourage open dialogue and collective learning