Implementation Challenges for an Effective Lessons Learned Process that provides his or her activity with little value , takes a fair amount of resources and time to implement . The solution is to have a simple procedure , ensure projects have the resources and time to implement the procedure , and hold staff accountable for following the process . The “ lack of value to my activity ” problem can be alleviated by proving to people the value of LL to the organisation and by ensuring that activities in the planning stages incorporate LL from prior activities .
Capturing The Lessons - Timing Is Everything
It is often feasible to wait until the end of an activity to capture and document the LL . On larger , longer term exercise / operation , the LL should be captured during or at the end of each activity phase ( e . g ., preparation , planning process , conduct ). As time passes , memories fade , people leave the activity and , if not captured in a timely manner , significant lessons are likely to be lost . All activities should have a formal post-activity review , for reviewing the LL on the activity . It can be demanding , especially when the project failed to meet its stated objectives . It is essential that these reviews are effectively facilitated to ensure the focus is on process improvement and not to affix blame .
Validation
For many complex activities the root cause of the problem is not always apparent . Learning cannot take place until the root cause ( s ) have been properly identified and appropriate corrective action ( s ) taken . This requires that each LL be analysed and validated by a Subject Matter Expert ( SME ) before it is entered into the LL database . The validation process must be simple and straight forward . A major contributor to making things too complicated is leader or organisational insistence on lengthy validation processes . This discourages sustained , meaningful contribution , because people quickly become frustrated with the formal system and return , at best , to the simpler method of knowledge sharing .
The Lessons Learned Database : Solutions , Not Problems
LL should be captured and placed in a database that is open to everyone in the organization . Unfortunately , LL databases are often difficult to search and provide little help to future activity . Like any effective database , the LL database must have an administrator whose job is to ensure that each lesson :
�� ��������������������������������priate SME .
�� � ������ ��� ����� ���� �������� ����� will benefit the performance of future activities .
�� � ������������� ���� �������� ��� ���� database in such a way to not proportion blame . Nothing will kill a LLP quicker than finger pointing .
�� � ����� ��� ������� ������������ ������� searchable , references the originator to ensure continuity and later contact and clarification .
Institutionalise The Lesson Learned
The learning part only comes when the lesson has been institutionalised ( e . g ., changing a policy , ( re ) writing a procedure , improving a work process ). This is the tough part of LL , especially when you are adressing and trying to convince twenty eight national representatives . Until the learning becomes a part of the way we do routine business , we will always be prone to making the same mistakes . The LLP must be effective in actually analyzing and implementing solutions .
Consider ‘ Best Practice ’
Considering that LL mostly come from the activities that didn ’ t go well and need improvement , we therefore tend to focus on negative learnings . However , suitably qualified and experienced OPRs and SMEs are able to and consistently develop imaginative and creative ways to do things that save time , money and improve performance . These positive learnings known as ‘ best practice ’ also need to be institutionalised , socialised and repeated . We need to make sure these positive learnings get in our LL database .
Betrayal Of National Secrets In the contemporary litigious society there are concerns and risks that if you document your mistakes , publish them in a database and make the database accessible to everyone , you open yourself for reprisasl or ridicule . Clearly there is risk but not having your HQ or Nation involved in the validation process presents greater complexity and challenges . Nations must decide on how to handle the balance between improving activities performance and releasing secret or confidential materiel .
Conclusions
NATO is a vast organisation that has multi-locations , complex management structures and a very diverse portfolio of activities , operations and projects . Although NATO is continuously looking for better mechanisms for sharing LL , the results are :
�� ����� ��� �������������� ����� ��� across HQs with no assurance that LL are being applied .
�� ��������� ��������� �������� ��������� capturing , and submitting lessons .
�� �������������������������������ganisational leadership .
�� �������� ��� ���������������������� comes from commitment to knowledge sharing .
If LL are captured at all , they are generally captured only within segments of the organisation and on an ad-hoc basis . So mistakes are often repeated from one activity to another . The key success factors include :
�� ������������������
�� ������� �� �������� ������� ���� standardised LLP . Follow up and institutionalise most important LL and hold staff accountable .
�� ���������� ��������� ����� ���� ��sources to capture , analyze and institutionalize the LL .
�� ����������������������������������� ensure LL are captured and maintain a well administered ‘ easy to access , easy to search ’ LL database .
�� ������������������������������������ the LL because the best added value of a LL lies in its subsequent exploitation .
LAND POWER25