The sponsoring manager should identify the retrospective objectives and the specific project aspects on which it should focus. Also consider the potential consequences of the activity. Who will come out ahead if the retrospective leads to some constructive process changes? Who might look bad if it reveals the root causes of problems? You’re not looking for scapegoats, but you do need to understand what really happened and why.

It isn’t realistic to expect the project manager to facilitate his own project’s retrospective objectively. The manager might have a particular axe to grind, want to protect his own reputation, or put his own spin on certain issues. Some project managers might unconsciously inhibit participation despite their good intentions. Other participants can be intimidated into silence on sensitive points.

To avoid these problems, invite an experienced, neutral facilitator from outside the project team to lead the retrospective. The facilitator’s prime objective is to make the retrospective succeed by surfacing the critical issues in a constructive environment. Consider having someone who is not an active retrospective participant act as scribe to record the issues generated so the facilitator can concentrate on, well, facilitating.

Of course, the essential participants are all of the project team members and other key stakeholders. Managers are invited to the retrospective only if they actually worked with the project team. However, you should provide a summary of lessons learned to senior management or to other managers in the company who could benefit from the information.

Some teams might be too busy, too large, or too geographically separated for all team members to participate in a retrospective concurrently. In such a case, select representatives of the various functional areas that were involved in the project. If a large project was divided into multiple subprojects, each one should perform its own retrospective. Delegates from each subproject can then participate in a higher-level retrospective at the overall project level.

If the project involved multiple groups who blame each other for the project’s problems or who refuse to sit down together to explore their common issues, you might begin by discussing the friction points between the groups. Chances are good that you’ll uncover important project issues. If the groups can’t get along in the retrospective, they probably clashed during the project, too. The retrospective might address what needs to change for those groups to work together more effectively the next time.

For example, one retrospective that involved participants from two groups who had collaborated on a project revealed that the people in the two groups had very different communication styles. The human factors team lead complained that she was left out of the loop on some important communications. The technical team lead protested that he had included the human factors people on every significant e-mail. It turned out that e-mail wasn’t the preferred or expected communication mechanism for the human factors people. Next time, these teams can agree in advance on how to handle their communications to avoid the same problems.

An invitation to a retrospective can stimulate fear, confusion, or resistance if the participants aren’t accustomed to retrospectives or if the project had serious problems. Some participants might be sick with anxiety, while others will be eager to let the accusations fly ("loaded for bear," as one of my clients put it). It’s important to build trust and establish a constructive mind-set. Provide information and reassurance to the participants in the invitation material and through "sales calls" made on team leaders and key participants. Make sure everyone understands the retrospective objectives and the activities to which they’ll be contributing. Describe the process in advance. Emphasize that this is a future-oriented and process-improvement activity, not a blame fest.

A retrospective should address the project’s processes and outcomes, not the participants’ personalities or mistakes. The facilitator has to concentrate on what actually happened and ensure that participants don’t blame or placate others. However, people often perceive events in different ways. Understanding their different interpretations can release hard feelings and provide the opportunity for new insights.

Note

Recommendations from the retrospective that are not specific, actionable, or realistic. Don’t expect such recommendations to do future projects any good.

Identify the information coming out of the retrospective that can be shared with the rest of the organization and with senior management. Some sensitive personal issues and conflicts might be revealed during the retrospective. In general, though, it’s not important who raised each issue so protect the privacy of those who contribute their thoughts and recommendations.

Identify the person who will write and take ownership of an improvement action plan and see that it leads to tangible benefits. This owner must carry enough weight in the organization to steer the people who execute the action plan toward completing their action items.