Gary Klein: “When people do After Action Reviews, they tend to ask about courses of actions … they don’t ask about cognitive demands.”
The idea is that cognitive demand reviews can extract richer information about expertise in response to incidents.
youtu.be/iqXXfU27GaI?t=
Conversation
Notice the questions he suggests:
Why did you think there was a problem?
What were you noticing?
What were you picking up on?
Was there anything that surprised you?
If I was doing the task, what would I have missed that you picked up on?
1
8
And possibly my favourite: “What did you notice here that you wouldn’t have 7 or 8 years ago?”
The thread seems to be getting at the cognitive elements of the expert’s decision making:
- What cues?
- What nuances of their skill exist today that they didn’t have in the past?
1
7
- And what are the expert-novice differences that exist? (Which we can see as the intention in those last two questions).
Quote Tweet
I think this needs to be said: if you’re trying to get better at thinking, looking at expert-novice differences (and, specifically the bits of expertise research that studies expert-novice differences) is a really, really good idea.
Show this thread
1
1
Quote Tweet
Replying to @ejames_c
The cognitive & psychological dimensions are often an overlooked element of incident response and after action reviews. We get the silliness of “we must be smarter next time”, yet tolerate “we must not panic/freeze/be fatalistic next time” with no accompanying remediation items.