Facilitating Level 2: Cross-Project Improvement 147
American Management Association
www.amanet.org
her timeline, signi cant data, improvements the she found useful, and
what she might do di erently next time.
3. Identify innovations. Working from their respective timelines, the group
members identify practices that improved results and should be in-
corporated into future projects. Questions to ask here include: What
worked well that we don’t want to forget? What did we learn from
this?
4. De ne additional improvements. The group discusses additional im-
provement opportunities that might be incorporated into future proj-
ect plans. If time allows, the list should be prioritized to collect the
team’s perspectives on which ones will have the most impact. Criteria
for prioritization might include impact on calendar time, work time,
customer satisfaction, quality, and/or employee development.
5. Determine if another iteration is required. Before ending the session, the
group, in consultation with the PMO leader, should decide whether
or not another iteration of improvement is required. It is likely that
signi cant problems will require multiple iterations to generate sus-
tainable improvement.
Norm Kerth (2001) and Esther Derby and Diana Larsen (2006) provide
a number of additional tools that can be used for process retrospectives,
including (for those familiar with quality tools) force eld analysis, ve
whys, and the shbone diagram, any of which can be useful depending
on the situation at hand.
Step 3d: Conduct the Process Retrospective
The retrospective is facilitated by the coach. As a skilled facilitator of
learning and improvement, he helps the group members look back on
their respective projects in ways that promote valid information, free and
informed choice, and internal commitment to changes. He helps people
collaborate e ectively, reminding people about tools such as TALK, the
Ladder of Inference, and collaborative con ict resolution (see Chapter
3 for a detailed discussion of how and under what circumstances the
coach should intervene to keep the group on track). When retrospec-
tives are conducted e ectively, groups will become increasingly skilled