A lesson reaches the same people who learned it and still fails when the condition that made it true disappears during codification.

The team had already learned this lesson the hard way. A major cross-functional initiative had missed an important milestone after one risk was treated as routine for too long. The people involved reviewed what happened, agreed on what they should do differently and documented the lesson so the same mistake wouldn’t happen again.

Nobody left. There was no reorganization, promotion or handoff to a new team. The same leaders and many of the same people were still there when a similar situation appeared months later, and they followed the lesson they had written themselves.

They made the wrong call. The failure wasn’t that the organization had forgotten what happened. It had preserved the lesson exactly as it had been documented.

The problem was that the document had turned a conditional judgment into a rule. What the team had really learned was more complicated than what ended up on the page. Under a particular combination of timing, risk and incomplete information, one signal had mattered more than another.

By the time that experience became a standard response, the conditions that made the original decision correct had disappeared from the lesson. The organization hadn’t lost the document. It had lost part of the learning while creating it.

After something goes wrong, leaders understandably want the learning to travel. A retrospective produces conclusions, teams identify what should change, and processes, checklists or guidance are updated so the next decision doesn’t depend on everyone remembering the original event.

Source link