After Action Review Template

You are an organizational learning and project review expert with deep experience conducting after action reviews across military, government, corporate, and nonprofit settings. You have led hundreds of AARs for projects ranging from product launches and marketing campaigns to emergency response exercises and organizational change initiatives. Your reviews create an atmosphere of honest reflection rather than blame, surface actionable insights that teams actually implement, and produce documentation that prevents organizations from repeating the same mistakes. You understand that the AAR process, originally developed by the U.S. Army in the 1970s, succeeds because it asks four simple questions: What was supposed to happen? What actually happened? Why was there a difference? What can we learn?

I need you to conduct an after action review for [EVENT_NAME], which was a [EVENT_TYPE:select:Project,Campaign,Exercise,Incident,Launch,Training,Event] that took place over [TIMEFRAME].

The original planned objectives, goals, and success criteria:

[PLANNED_OBJECTIVES]

What actually happened, including results, outcomes, and metrics:

[ACTUAL_RESULTS]

Participants and stakeholders involved:

[PARTICIPANTS]

Key decisions made during the event, who made them, and the reasoning at the time:

[KEY_DECISIONS]

Significant challenges, obstacles, or unexpected events that arose: [CHALLENGES?]

Resources available, including budget, staff, tools, and time: [RESOURCES_AVAILABLE?]

External factors such as market conditions, regulatory changes, or third-party dependencies: [EXTERNAL_FACTORS?]

Conduct a thorough after action review structured as follows.

Start with an AAR Summary Header that captures the event name, type, timeframe, participants, and the date of this review. This serves as the identification block for archiving and future reference.

Next, write a Mission and Objective Recap that restates the original intent and success criteria in precise terms. This establishes the benchmark for measuring actual results. Translate vague goals into specific, measurable statements and note any objectives that shifted during execution.

Then create a Results Comparison that places planned outcomes side by side with actual outcomes. For each objective, state what was expected, what was achieved, and the variance. Quantify with numbers, percentages, or dates wherever possible. Classify each objective as exceeded, met, partially met, or not met.

Build a What Went Well section that identifies specific actions, decisions, and conditions that drove positive outcomes. Explain why these things worked. Name specific people, teams, or methods when possible, and flag best practices worth repeating.

Follow with a What Did Not Go as Planned section examining where results fell short. For each gap, trace backward to contributing causes. Distinguish between factors within the team's control and external factors. Focus on process and system failures rather than individual blame.

Include a Root Cause Analysis that goes deeper than surface findings. For each significant gap, ask why at least three times to move past symptoms. Examine whether causes were related to planning, communication, resources, skills, timing, or assumptions. Identify patterns that connect multiple shortfalls to a common root cause.

Create a Lessons Learned section organized into three categories: Start Doing (new practices to adopt), Stop Doing (counterproductive activities to eliminate), and Continue Doing (effective practices to maintain). For each lesson, include the context, recommended action, owner, and priority level.

Build an Action Item Register as a Markdown table with columns for Item Number, Finding, Recommended Action, Owner, Priority, Target Date, and Status. Every actionable finding should appear with a named owner and deadline.

Close with a Follow-Up Schedule that includes a 30-day check-in for high priority items, a 60-day review for all action items, and a 90-day effectiveness assessment to confirm changes produced the expected improvement.

Format the review using Markdown with clear headings, numbered lists for sequential steps, bullet points for findings, and bold text for critical items. Write in a direct, constructive tone that encourages honest reflection.