Post Mortem vs Retrospective in Project Management

Image

Quick Summary

In this article, we explore the key differences between post mortem and retrospective in project management. Understanding their unique roles helps teams address issues and improve future projects. We discuss when and why to use each approach, offering insights for better team collaboration and project outcomes. For more details, visit our blog and deepen your understanding.

Understanding the Distinction Between Post Mortem and Retrospective

Reflecting on what went wrong after a project ends and analyzing what can be improved during a project are two sides of the same coin. In project management, learning from both successes and challenges is crucial for continuous growth. Post-mortems and retrospectives are two approaches that help achieve this, but they are applied at different times and focus on distinct aspects of the project. 

In this Instatus article, we’ll explore the unique characteristics, benefits, and use cases for post-mortems and retrospectives, helping you understand how each practice can contribute to your project’s success.

Why Listen to Us?

At Instatus, we are experts in project management processes, with a strong focus on collaboration and workflow optimization. Our in-depth research and hands-on experience with different strategies have allowed us to gain insights into how teams can improve their efficiency, communication, and delivery. 

Our comparison of post-mortems vs retrospectives is grounded in practical knowledge, helping you make an informed decision about which method fits best with your team.

Instatus customers

Post Mortem vs Retrospective: An Overview

Before we go into the specifics of each practice, let’s look at a brief comparison of post-mortems vs retrospectives.

A post-mortem is typically conducted after a project is completed, focusing on analyzing the entire project lifecycle. It identifies what went wrong, examines any significant issues or failures, and provides recommendations for improvement. Post-mortems are usually used in response to project failures or major problems, with the goal of preventing similar issues in the future.

A retrospective, on the other hand, is a process commonly used in Agile frameworks, conducted after each sprint or iteration. It focuses on evaluating the team's collaboration, communication, and process efficiency during that specific period. Retrospectives provide opportunities for continuous improvement, with an emphasis on assessing smaller portions of the project rather than a single, significant event.

What Is Post Mortem?

source

A post-mortem, often referred to as a "post-mortem analysis," is a practice used after a project has been completed, typically after a failure or significant setback. The goal is to gather insights into what went wrong during the project, analyze its causes, and identify areas for improvement.

Let’s say a software development project was delayed due to miscommunication between the design and dev teams. A post-mortem would be conducted to identify the root cause, which could be poor planning, unclear expectations, or lack of collaboration tools. This feedback is then used to improve the process for future projects.

Key features of post-mortems include:

  • Analysis of the Entire Project Lifecycle: A post-mortem evaluates the whole project, from start to finish, including planning, execution, and delivery.
  • Identification of Failures and Issues: It focuses on uncovering what went wrong, whether it was a specific failure, poor communication, missed deadlines, or a lack of resources.
  • Root Cause Analysis: A key element is identifying the root causes of problems. This might involve delving into underlying issues such as ineffective processes, team dynamics, or external factors.
  • Lessons Learned: The process includes capturing lessons learned to prevent similar mistakes in future projects. This helps the team and organization grow and improve.
  • Recommendations for Improvement: Based on the findings, post-mortems typically produce actionable recommendations for how to improve processes, tools, or practices in future projects.

Pros and Cons

Pros:

  • Provides a comprehensive analysis of the entire project, helping teams understand what went wrong and why.
  • Helps identify key lessons learned, which can inform future projects and prevent similar mistakes.
  • Allows for in-depth discussions on failures and successes, promoting transparency within the team.
  • Offers a structured approach to improving processes and avoiding repeating the same issues.
  • Encourages accountability and ownership of mistakes, helping individuals and teams learn and grow.

Cons:

  • Can focus too much on blame, which may lead to defensiveness rather than constructive feedback.
  • May occur too late in the project lifecycle, missing opportunities for real-time improvements.
  • Can be time-consuming, especially if the project was large or complex, delaying decision-making or progress.
  • Risk of team members feeling discouraged or demotivated when confronted with mistakes or failures.
  • Can become repetitive if teams fail to take action on the insights gained from previous post-mortems.

What Is Retrospective?

source

A retrospective is a regular meeting or review process used primarily in Agile frameworks, such as Scrum or Kanban, to reflect on the work completed during a specific period, typically after each sprint or iteration. This meeting provides an opportunity for the team to come together and assess the work they've done, the processes they've followed, and the overall team dynamics. 

The main goal of a retrospective is to evaluate the team's performance, identify both strengths and areas for improvement, and collaboratively determine actions that can help optimize future work.

For instance, after a sprint where your team successfully launched a feature, a retrospective could focus on what made that sprint run smoothly. But, if the sprint faced issues (like unclear priorities), the retrospective would explore what caused those problems and create an action plan to improve.

Key features of retrospectives include:

  • Reflecting on the Sprint or Iteration: The team looks back on the recent sprint or iteration to discuss what went well, what didn’t, and what could be improved.
  • Focus on Continuous Improvement: Unlike a post-mortem, which is usually done after the completion of a project, a retrospective focuses on ongoing development. It’s an opportunity for teams to fine-tune their processes, communication, and collaboration practices regularly.
  • Team Participation: Retrospectives are typically held with the entire team, including developers, product owners, and Scrum Masters. Everyone contributes their views on the team's performance and the sprint's outcomes.
  • Safe Space for Open Discussion: The retrospective creates a safe environment where team members can openly discuss problems, frustrations, and successes without fear of blame or judgment.
  • Actionable Outcomes: The goal of the meeting is to create action items or improvement plans that can be implemented in the next sprint or iteration. These actions are typically small, achievable changes aimed at improving efficiency and team dynamics.

Pros and Cons 

Pros:

  • Fosters a culture of continuous improvement by regularly assessing and adjusting team processes.
  • Provides an opportunity for team members to share feedback and voice concerns in a safe, open environment.
  • Allows for quick identification and resolution of small issues before they become bigger problems.
  • Helps improve team collaboration and communication, enhancing overall team performance.
  • Creates actionable takeaways that can be immediately implemented in the next sprint or iteration.

Cons:

  • Can become repetitive if not carefully facilitated or if teams fail to generate fresh insights.
  • May lead to surface-level discussions that don’t address deeper, systemic issues.
  • Can be uncomfortable for some team members, particularly if they feel their contributions are not being taken seriously.
  • Time-consuming if not well-managed, especially for teams with tight schedules or numerous projects.
  • Risk of losing focus if retrospectives become too focused on specific individuals or minor issues rather than team-wide improvements.

5 Key Differences Between Post Mortem and Retrospective

1. Timing

  • Post-mortems are held after a project’s completion, especially after significant issues or failure, to analyze the overall project outcome and identify areas for improvement in future projects.
  • Retrospectives take place during the project, typically after each sprint or iteration, to evaluate short-term progress, team performance, and identify areas for improvement to enhance future iterations.

2. Focus

  • Post-mortems focus on analyzing failures and mistakes in a project, identifying major problems or challenges, and learning from them to improve future project outcomes and avoid recurring issues.
  • Retrospectives aim to improve team processes and collaboration by evaluating both successes and areas for growth, identifying opportunities for improvement, and fostering continuous learning throughout the project.

3. Scope

  • Post-mortems have a broader scope, reviewing the entire project lifecycle, particularly when things go wrong. They analyze key events, failures, and lessons to improve future projects and avoid repeating mistakes.
  • Retrospectives have a narrower scope, concentrating on specific sprints or iterations. They aim to evaluate short-term progress, identify immediate improvements, and ensure continuous improvement throughout the project without reviewing the entire lifecycle.

4. Action Plan

  • Post-mortems generate long-term corrective actions by addressing systemic issues in project management or execution, helping to prevent future problems and improve overall processes for future projects or initiatives.
  • Retrospectives focus on immediate, actionable improvements, allowing teams to address short-term issues and make adjustments that can be implemented in the next sprint or iteration for continuous enhancement of team performance.

5. Frequency

  • Post-mortems are typically held after a project ends or when significant issues arise, offering a one-time opportunity to analyze the entire project, understand what went wrong, and implement long-term improvements.
  • Retrospectives are recurring meetings held during the project, usually after each sprint. These sessions focus on assessing the team’s short-term progress, identifying areas for improvement, and making actionable changes for future iterations.

Post-Mortem vs Retrospective in Action for Stronger Project Outcomes

Choosing between a post-mortem and a retrospective depends on your team’s needs and the specific challenges you face. Post-mortems are ideal for deeply analyzing project failures and making long-term improvements, while retrospectives offer a more ongoing, agile approach to continuous team growth and process refinement. 

Both methods have their advantages and drawbacks, but when implemented together, they can ensure that your team is always learning and evolving to meet future challenges more effectively. Understanding when and how to use each practice will help your team navigate the complexities of project management and deliver higher-quality results.

Are you ready to break down your next project and uncover what worked (and what didn’t)?

Start integrating post-mortems and retrospectives into your workflow for free today