After Action Reviews – A Post-Litigation Autopsy of What Went Right and What Went Wrong

M. Jansen Voss

Humans have been trying to be better, faster, stronger, and more efficient for millennia. The Industrial Revolution ushered in sweeping changes in how goods were produced and resulted in the development of modern-day factories with automated technology and assembly lines. Sports teams examine post-game footage and statistics in an effort to improve.  There is no shortage of self-help books and videos and almost every industry has given a name to their improvement processes: Lean, Agile, Sigma, Six Sigma, Scrum - all terms for quality assurance and improvement.

As part of my efforts to improve the litigation process for clients, I conduct an After Action Review (AAR) following significant matters. AAR is an improvement process used by the United States Army as a structured approach for reflecting on the work of a group and identifying strengths, weaknesses, and areas of improvement. The objective of an after-action review is to improve future work performance. AARs require reflection on multiple points:

1. What was the goal?
2. What was the outcome?
3. What were the primary factors contributing to the outcome?
4. What did we do well?
5. What did we not do well?

A Framework for Conducting an After Action Review

1. What was the goal?

Set goals and formulate a strategic plan which then guides everything decision made in the case.

2. What was the outcome?

Focus on what actually happened - no judgment zone.

3. What were the primary factors causing or contributing to the outcome?

• Are the factors within your control?
• Are factors internal or external?
• Lawsuit management issue or pre-suit problem?
• Luck?

4. What did we do well?

• Why?
• How?
• Can we improve or repeat?
• Are there lessons learned? Training opportunities?
• How did the particular action meet, or contribute to the goal?

5. What did we did not do well?

• Why?
• How can we improve? Or prevent next time?
• What could we do differently next time?
• What caused tension? Surprises? Extra-work?
• How was communication throughout the process?

Parting Thoughts on After Action Reviews

Before conducting an AAR, the lawyer and the client need to trust each other and acknowledge that the review process can be uncomfortable at times, but is important for the client and the lawyer to improve. To avoid past mistakes and leverage past successes, conducting an AAR requires:

• Openness
• Non-judgmental attitude
• Egalitarian approach
• Discipline

AARs benefit the client and the firm in a number of ways, including:

• Builds a shared awareness of the client's business interests, and litigation goals.
• Develops a decentralized bank of knowledge among employees.
• Sparks creativity: "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Einstein
• Leads to faster decision-making.
• Minimizes interpretation of the outcome. A firm's objective and realistic understanding ooff what went right and what went wrong is an important part of organizational control.

About Christian & Small

Christian & Small LLP represents a diverse clientele throughout Alabama, the Southeast, and the nation with clients ranging from individuals and closely-held businesses to Fortune 500 corporations. By matching highly experienced lawyers with specific client needs, Christian & Small develops innovative, effective, and efficient solutions for clients. With offices in Birmingham, metro-Jackson, Mississippi, and the Alabama Gulf Coast, Christian & Small focuses on the areas of litigation and business, is a member of the International Society of Primerus Law Firms, and is the only Alabama-based member firm in the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity. Our corporate social responsibility program is focused on education, and diversity is one of Christian & Small's core values.

No representation is made that the quality of legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.