This paper is about Lean and Continuous Improvement principles and tools, focusing in the After Action Report as the way to practice the “check” and “adjust” at PDCA cycle. It presents the After Action Report - a Lean and Continuous Improvement tool, as a tool for those who are interested in supporting continuous improvement, practicing “check” and “adjust”, individually and in organizations and teams. This tool can be applied everywhere, in every projects or daily situations, and every time (as it is “continuous”). The main goal is to clarify that, when we have a structure, it becomes easier to support the practice of continuous improvement.

1. Proceedings of 2100 Projects Association Joint Conferences – Vol.X (2015) 1
After Action Report:
a structured support to the practice of
continuous improvement
Abstract
This paper is about Lean and Continuous Improvement principles and tools,
focusing in the After Action Report as the way to practice the “check” and “adjust”
at PDCA cycle.
It presents the After Action Report - a Lean and Continuous Improvement tool, as
a tool for those who are interested in supporting continuous improvement,
practicing “check” and “adjust”, individually and in organizations and teams. This
tool can be applied everywhere, in every projects or daily situations, and every
time (as it is “continuous”). The main goal is to clarify that, when we have a
structure, it becomes easier to support the practice of continuous improvement.
Keywords
After Action Report, Lean Management, Continuous Improvement, PDCA,
Feedback
1. Introduction
As this paper is about a Lean and Continuous Improvement principles and
tools, we will introduce it supported by the tool 5W2H.
The “what”: to present the After Action Report - a Lean and Continuous
Improvement tool. The “who”: for those who are interested in supporting
continuous improvement, practicing “check” and “adjust”, individually
and in organizations and teams. The “where”: the After Action Report can
be everywhere, in every projects or daily situations. The “when”: as for
the “where”, continuous improvement can be applied every time (as it is
“continuous”). The “why”: because when we have a structure, it becomes
easier to support the practice of continuous improvement. The “how”:
that is what we will present in this paper, a very simple and agile tool and
how to work with it. The “how much”: an A3 paper sheet, a pen, data and
facts, people envolved and the willingness to improve.
2. Problem solving methods
Problem-solving methods enable the reuse of reasoning knowledge
(Fencel, 1998; Clancey, 1985). Clancey (1985) reported on the analysis of a
set of first generation expert systems developed to solve different tasks.
This author, discovered a common problem solving behavior and was able
to abstract it to a generic inference pattern called “heuristic classification”.
When considering the problem solving method heuristic classification in
some more detail, it is possible to identify the three basic inference
actions: abstract, heuristic match and refine. It is important to see that
© 2100 Projects Association www.2100projects.org
João Paulo Pinto
CLT Services, Lda
CEO
4430-208, Vila Nova de Gaia
Portugal
mgt@cltservices.net
Christiane Tscharf
Learning Everywhere, Lda
CEO
4200-502, Porto
Portugal
christiane@learningeverywhere.eu

2. 2 Proceedings of 2100 Projects Association Joint Conferences – Vol.X (20XX)
such a description of a problem-solving method is given in a generic way, thus the reuse of different problem-
solving methods, in different domains, is made possible (Fencel, 1998).
At this time, various problem-solving methods have been identified, and the concept of problem-solving is
closely related to continuous improvement, and is present in a large number of frameworks, one of them, Lean
Management.
The Scientific Method and PDCA Cycle are both simple and effective problem-solving and continuous
improvement methods, that are frequently related with Lean Philosophy. In spite of the fact that they are two
of the most popular methods, they are not always used in practice, may be due too its simple way of how they
work. Sometimes, we think that the most complex tools will be the more effective and there is a tendency to
relativize the simplest.
The Scientific Method and the PDCA Cycle are different but they have in common the importance of analyzing
what has been done and draw lessons learned in order to improve. They both work about “check” and “adjust”.
2.1. The Scientific Method
The scientific method is a process for experimentation that is used to explore observations and answer
questions. Gower (1997), refers to this method as the “logic of science”, that has occupied the attention of
some of the greatest scientific and philosophical thinkers. Scientists use the scientific method to search for
cause and effect relationships. In other words, they design an experiment so that changes to one item cause
something else to vary in a predictable way.
Just as it does for a professional scientist, the scientific method can help anyone to focus on a question,
construct an hypothesis, design, execute, and evaluate an experiment. This method's main propose is to find
the “truth”. “The correspondence concept of truth, with priority of nature over belief. Here the state of nature
is a flower with five petals, and the person's belief that is that the flower has five petals, so nature and belief
correspond, and consequently this brilliant scientist's belief is true. It is the flower's petals, not he scientist's
beliefs that control the right answer. Beliefs corresponding with reality are true.” (Gauch, 2003: 32). The
Scientific Method is materialized in some steps, that are presented below.
2.1.1. Steps of the Scientific Method
1. Ask a Question: The scientific method starts by asking question about something that is observed:
What,How, When, Who, Which, Why, or Where? And, in order for the scientific method to answer the
question, it should be about something that is possible to measure, preferably, with a number.
2. Do Background Research: Rather than starting from scratch in putting together a plan for answering
the question, doing background research can help to find a best way to do things and insure that
mistakes from the past will not be repeated.
3. Construct an Hypothesis: An hypothesis is an educated guess about how things work:
"If _____[I do this] _____, then _____[this]_____ will happen."
The hypothesis should be stated in a way that it can easily be measured, and in a way that helps to
answer to the original question.
4. Test the Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment: The experiment tests whether the hypothesis is
supported or not. It is important for the experiment to be a fair test. A fair test can be conducted by
making sure that it will change only one factor at a time, while keeping all other conditions the same.
The experiments should also be repeated several times, to make sure that the first results weren't just
an accident.
5. Analyze Data and Draw a Conclusion: Once the experiment is complete, measurements should be
collected and analyzed , to see if they support the hypothesis or not. Scientists often find that their
hypothesis was not supported, and in such cases they will construct a new hypothesis based on the
information they learned during their experiment. This starts the entire process of the scientific
www.2100projects.org © 2100 Projects Association

3. Proceedings of 2100 Projects Association Joint Conferences – Vol.X (2015) 3
method over again. Even if they find that their hypothesis was supported, they may want to test it
again in a new way.
6. Communicate Results: To complete the Scientific Method, the results shall be communicated to
others in a final report. This final report can be an After Action Report, that will be presented in this
paper. Even though the Scientific Method may only seem a series of steps, it is important to keep in
mind that new information or data might cause a back up and repeat steps at any point during the
process. A process like the Scientific Method that involves such backing up and repeating is called an
interative process. An interactive process is a process in continuous improvement and is supported by
feedback.
2.2. The PDCA cycle
The PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Adjust) Cycle can be also called “Plan–Do–Study–Act (PDSA) cycle, Deming cycle or
Shewhart Cycle.
The PDCA consists in a four–step model for problem solving and continuous improvement. Just as a circle has
no end, the PDCA cycle should be repeated again and again for continuous improvement (as it is called
“continuous”).
PDCA Cycle can (and it is recommended) to use as a model for continuous improvement, also when starting a
new improvement project or developing a new or improved design of a process, product or service.
2.2.1. Steps of the PDCA Cycle
1. Plan, is to recognize an opportunity and plan a change.
2. Do, consists in testing the change, put it into practice.
3. Check, is to review the practice done, analyze the results and identify what have been learned.
4. Act, consists in taking action based on what have been learned in the scheck step: If the practice did not
work, go through the cycle again with a different plan. If it has been successful, incorporate it from into wider
changes. Use what have been learned to plan new improvements, beginning the cycle again.
3. Continuous improvement: the importance of “check” and “adjust”
Lean Thinking basic principles are related to continuous improvement and we can say that the main goal of
implementing Lean is, in fact, continuous improvement and the pursuit of excellence and agility.
Continuous improvement processes feature a systems approach to improving the workflow in an organization.
Typical phases of continuous improvement include to use data to analyse the results of practice (check) and to
adjust or implement some change, if the results were not what was required/wanted. Planning and doing are
important but, if we just plan and do, we will may not be working to continuous improvement. Check and
adjust enables to look to what has been done and to verify if the results were the best or not, and, if so, what
should be changed, in the next plan.
4. After Action Report: a support for “check” and “adjust”
4.1. After Action Report: the tool and how to use it
The After Action Report (AAR) is arguably one of the most successful methods of organizational learning.
Widely used in military, its origin dates back, according to historical data, to the Armed Forces of the United
States of America. In the military environment, the planning is extremely important for a successful practice.
The best way to improve practice, is to continuously improve the planning. And the best way to improve
© 2100 Projects Association www.2100projects.org

4. 4 Proceedings of 2100 Projects Association Joint Conferences – Vol.X (20XX)
planning is to assess what has been done and draw lessons learned after practice: what went less well, what
went better and how it could be improved in next time. In practice, it is to “check” and to “adjust”. In
Engineering, "fail to plan, is planning to fail"; in the Lean philosophy, plan without analyzing what has been
done previously, is waste, especially a waste of an opportunity to create value.
Sometimes, organizations tend to reduce the practice of working with AAR to a sterile technique. Often there is
not even this practice. It should be noted that the After Action Report, as the name implies, is applied after an
action. In terms of PDCA cycle, AAR will correspond to Check and Adjust phases .
The AAR can be prepared at the end of a project or activity. It can also be drawn up after each task within a
project or main activity, thus becoming a process of constant learning and continuous improvement cycle. The
decision about the moment is subjective, being dependent on the criterion in question and common sense,
always based on the lean principles of eliminating waste and creating value. This means that it makes sense to
prepare an AAR whenever it contributes to the elimination of waste and future improvements. If our analysis
result in the perception that too many AAR generate bureaucracy, then it is obvious that is not lean, so we
should immediately review the procedure. The logic is this.
A template proposal to work with this tool is the following:
Each phase of the AAR has a main goal that can be structured with the help of some questions and guidelines :
1) Summary
- Describe, briefly, the main points of the project, the objectives, scope of action, people or teams involved.
2)Analysis of results
- What were the initial objectives?
- What happened, in fact?
- There were deviations from the original objectives? If so, what?
www.2100projects.org © 2100 Projects Association
AFTER ACTION REPORT
PROJECT:
PROJECT LEADER: DATE:
MAIN GOAL:
SUMMARY RESULTS ANALYSIS
CRITICAL TASKS ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS

5. Proceedings of 2100 Projects Association Joint Conferences – Vol.X (2015) 5
- What were the obtained results?
3) Analysing critical tasks
Note: critical tasks are tasks that most influenced the project, and may be positive or negative
- What went worse?
- What difficulties have occurred? Because of what?
- What went better?
- What have encouraged?
4) Recommendations
- What to do in order to avoid what went worse / overcome difficulties?
- What to do in order to keep what went better?
- How to improve the process?
- What can be done differently next time?
4.2. Basic rules in working with AAR
There are some basic rules to consider when working with AAR. It may seem very simple and common sense,
but they might do the difference to the success of continuous improvement:
- Make the AAR a practice in all levels of the organization;
- To analyze and criticize the process (not the people);
- Each and every one of the team members must contribute with inputs;
- No process is perfect; all processes can be improved;
It is also important to determine who communicate the AAR. Sometimes, it may concern only to the team itself
(or person, it can be used for self-reflection); in other situations, it will can be of good value to share with
colleagues, other teams or departments. Since this a visual tool, it may be affixed to an appropriate place in
order to share information.
The After Action Report is simple to prepare, which should not be confused with the fact that it is easy, since it
must have the depth of analysis and reflection needed to identify waste and the possible ways to eliminate
them in the future.
4.3. The facilitator's role
The facilitator – or the team leader, or who may be the person who will conduct the work and the fulfillment of
the AAR - should take into account some aspects.
- To ensure that everyone knows the tool and knows how to work with it;
- Ask “why” certain actions were taken;
- Ask what was the reaction to certain situations;
- Question the beginning and end date of the action;
- Look the thinking and motivations behind the actions by introducing questions such as "What is that
intended / aspired / thought ...?";
- Promote the exchange of experiences and reflections;
- Ask each one what happened from their point of view;
© 2100 Projects Association www.2100projects.org

6. 6 Proceedings of 2100 Projects Association Joint Conferences – Vol.X (20XX)
- Try to explore alternative resources that could have been more effective (this is very important, it puts people
to think and in a state of resources);
- When the discussion turns to the mistakes, seek to emphasize the positive and what might be done
differently next time.
5. Conclusions
At the end of a cycle, be it work, whether on a personal level, it is important to draw lessons learned from what
was done so that, when launching the new cycle, the previous errors are avoided and reinforced good
practices.
The After Action Report (AAR) is a simple and powerful tool that helps you learn from past experiences and get
immediate concrete improvements (by analysis and reflection that promotes), to carry out future tasks. It
should be noted that the structure of this tool guides the reasoning, starting from the abstract to the concrete,
and again allowing the work in the abstract on a sustained basis. In summary, lies the design, scope and
objectives. This first phase, help in the transition from abstract and vague to the concrete, to the project itself.
The results analysis phase, again, focusing on concrete facts. It is important here to work based on facts, not
assumptions. The Analysis of Critical Tasks, which already implies greater ability to abtraction, is sustained by
focusing on the analysis from the results recorded in the previous phase. Finally, lessons learned and
recommendations that appeal to the results of reflective capacity before the waste found - to minimize or
eliminate - and the value created - to maintain and enhance. This is the stage where creativity and innovation
have an important role in future suggestions for improvements.
The key to an effective AAR is openness and honesty, which allows all the organization's employees or
participants in the project can participate with facts, analysis, reflections, insights and sincere perspectives of
strengths and weaknesses and opportunities for improvement for the future. Are details that are often lacking
in extensive final reports of the project, which do little more beyond the short, sometimes just summarized,
what has been done. Worked this way, the AAR facilitates proper analysis of what really happened so that
lessons can be learned for the future, realizing the "Act" stage of the PDCA cycle.
Acknowledgments
References
Bodek, N. et al. (2012) The Harada Method – The spirit of self reliance. PCB Inc.
Fencel, D. (1998). Problem-Solving Methods – Understanding, Description, Development, and Reuse. Berlin:
Springer.
Gauch, H. G. Jr (2003). Scientific Method in Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gower, B. (1997). Scientific Method – An historical and philosophical introduction. London: Routledge.
Liker, J. K. et al (2004). The Toyota Way – 14 management principles the world's greatest manufacturer. McGraw-
Hill.
Pinto, J. P. (2009). Pensamento Lean – A filosofia das organizações vencedoras. Lídel.
Steinbeck, M. (2006). Enablers of Reconfiguration Dynamics. In F. Shadow (Ed.), Information Technology for
Manufacturing (pp. 141-149). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Tague, N. R. (2004). The Quality Toolbox. Milwalkee: ASQ Quality Press.
www.2100projects.org © 2100 Projects Association