The AAR: Those Who Do Not Learn From History Are Doomed to Repeat It

The After Action Review (AAR) is a learning opportunity that is at the heart of effective cost management and control. COL Ted Chopin was a master of conducting an AAR. The picture and the words are his when he was the Garrison Commander of the Army’s Fort Huachuca.

Military Roots of the AAR

In their book Into the Storm Clancy and Franks describe the transformation in the U.S. Army from Viet Nam to Desert Storm. Their observation was that the U.S. military vastly improved its mission capability as demonstrated in its swift victory in Kuwait. One of their conclusions was that the AAR process was key to the change.

“After a training event the OC (observer controller) led a small seminar for the participant during which they could discover for themselves what they needed to do . . . to improve commander and unit performance.”

The book describes the process as the AAR worked through the questions of “what was expected”, “what happened” and “why was there a difference.” Working through this agenda provides a forum for self-discovery and learning. This is much more impactful than having the OC give a critique that is more than likely to stimulate defensive reaction.

The effectiveness of the AAR lies in its insistence in not placing blame or making harsh judgements. Participation is required and anyone can safely bring up issues regardless of rank. The spirit of the meeting is that mistakes are inevitable and the goal is to learn from that recent history. It is repeating of mistakes that the unit seeks to avoid.

Another key point is that the review is based on objective data. There must be facts, not opinions, to the question of “what happened”? It must be so or else the participants could not be expected to take the review seriously.

An Army general officer once told me he hosted an exchange with Russian officer visitors who were totally shocked by the openness in an AAR they observed. Their comment was that such public self-criticism could never happen in the Russian army.

The AAR institutionalized the accountability for improvement. It ensured that the participants were continuously learning from their experience which is a prerequisite to continuously improving their performance.

Another point worth making is that the AAR forum provides a platform for the leader/manager to signal expectations. Just look at the photo of COL Chopin signaling his “sadness.”

The AAR in Cost Management and Control

The Cost AAR is important for all the same reasons. The idea is to compare actual cost performance to a plan, target, or past experience base. Either base provides a basis for comparison. When COL Chopin started the Cost AAR at Fort Huachuca we tried

forecasting cost for the future month. We soon discovered that comparing performance to the prior period worked well enough to meet the learning and accountability goals.

The Cost AAR should stimulate thought and group discussion as to how good results can be duplicated as well as how poor results can be improved.