Decisions.

The framework

1. 01

   Set the scene: the project has already failed.

   Don't frame it as 'what might go wrong.' Frame it as 'it's one year from now and this project has definitively failed — not underperformed, failed.' The declarative framing forces participants out of defensive mode and into explanation mode. Explanation produces more specific risks than prediction.

2. 02

   Give every person in the room two minutes to write independently.

   The silent writing phase is the mechanism that defeats groupthink. When participants share verbally first, later contributors anchor to early answers. Written-first means each person's risk list is independent. In a room of six people, independent writing produces three to four times more distinct failure modes than open discussion.

3. 03

   Cluster the risks and find the ones that appear in multiple lists.

   After sharing, cluster by theme. The risks that appear on multiple independent lists are the ones the group is collectively sensing but hasn't made explicit. These are your highest-confidence risks. The risks that appear on only one list deserve a quick reality test — is this idiosyncratic or prescient?

4. 04

   Assign a mitigation or an acceptance for the top three risks.

   The pre-mortem isn't useful if it ends with a list. For each top-three risk, decide: can we change the plan to reduce this risk? If yes, make the change. If no, is the risk acceptable given the upside? Explicit acceptance is a decision; implicit acceptance is negligence. Write both in the decision document.