Another way of putting this: post-incident analysis writeups need to include a "methods" section, allowing a reader to understand what analytical choices the author/analyst made.https://twitter.com/allspaw/status/1164894532326035460 …
John, I’m having trouble understanding this and the “went well” thing, but I feel like it’s important to understand. Is “went well” just not useful, or is it actively harmful? What’s the connection between “went well” and “methods”?
(I am
with you re counterfactuals.)
-
-
I’m looking through the “went well” of the last handful of PagerDuty postmortems, and I lean towards “not helpful” - it’s sort of a combination of gratitude and calling out where a past decision paid off. But I don’t see an “actively harmful”.
-
The intent of that section (at least in the PagerDuty process, I can't speak to others) isn't to make incident analysis better, but rather to provide a way to highlight some positive things from the incident in order to give the people involved some encouragement/gratitude. [1/5]
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.