Purpose
In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures.
Decision Making Decision method
Pre-Mortem
Anticipates failure and makes prevention testable.
A hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Which plausible reasons could make this initiative fail at the assumed point, and how will we detect or reduce them?
- Participants
- Small cross-functional group
- Time
- 20–45 min
Plausible failure reasons are assumptions; signals and prevention make them testable.
Frame
Clarify initiative and horizon
Define the initiative, success, and the assumed failure point.
Assume
Assume failure
Imagine the group after failure and state the hypothetical frame.
Surface
Collect reasons independently
First collect concrete reasons, cascades, and leading signals silently.
Act
Act on risks
Prioritize actionable risks and link prevention, monitoring, contingency, owner, and review date.
Follow-up
Agree review and ownership
Close by agreeing who observes which signals and by when. Evaluate actual effects after implementation.
Update when new observations, signals, or effects appear.
A good fit when
Use it before an uncertain initiative or decision where the team can act. It is a thought experiment, not a forecast or a demand to invent catastrophe.
Ideal for
- Launch planning
- Strategic initiatives
- High-uncertainty projects
Not good for
- Routine tasks
- Pure ideation
Outputs
Risk prevention plan
Concrete outcomes with an owner, effect signal and agreed review date.
Working board
Fictional example
Structured board with a blank workspace and fictional example view.
Risks
Fictional: late inventory sync
Returns sync late; double bookings increase.
Signals
Fictional: two double bookings per week
Leading signal for inconsistent availability.
Actions
Fictional: sync spike
Sam checks the sync before the pilot; manual confirmation is the contingency.
- Stay hypothetical
- Reasons are plausible assumptions until evidence or tests change them.
First step
Start with a clear period, goal, and safe frame.
Deep dive
How it works
The scenario is mentally moved to the point where it has already gone wrong. From there, plausible triggers, chain effects, and blind spots are named until the most sensitive assumptions become visible. The resulting risk logic then guides deliberately into prevention, monitoring, and contingency paths.
In detail
A Pre-Mortem breaks up optimistic group dynamics by mentally viewing an initiative after it has failed. The method is strong when it produces concrete triggers, dependencies, and early warning signals, not just general worries. The benefit lies in manageable precaution: risks are described so that prevention, monitoring, or deliberate acceptance become possible.
Facilitation
Set the real decision, the most critical bet, and the boundary of the initiative in advance. The turning point comes when general fears turn into concrete early indicators and preventive measures. Close with responsibilities for safeguarding, monitoring, and escalation, not just a long list of risks.
The method guide walks execution through 5 phases, timing, 5 pitfalls, and clear stop criteria.
Open method guideYour perspective
Does this method help with your work?
Your feedback helps shape the next improvements to methodatlas.
Sources and topics
In playbooks
Artifact templates
Pre-Mortem: WorksheetPlan purpose, period, and the next work block.markdown
Pre-Mortem: WorksheetPlan purpose, period, and the next work block.
markdownpre-mortem-working-template.md
Plan purpose, period, and the next work block.
Pre-Mortem: Worksheet
Question
To be confirmed
Desired outcome
To be confirmed
Scope
Whole flow Time: In one session
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
Preparation for this scope
Method setup
- Materials: Board, Stickies, Timer
- Roles: The facilitator holds the hypothetical frame; the sponsor provides goal and boundaries; participants collect reasons independently; the scribe records risks, signals, and owners.
- Advance information: Collect the decision, goal, success criteria, assumptions, dependencies, and assumed failure point beforehand.
- Overall time needed: 45 minutes
- Setup: Show the scenario sentence. Collect risks silently first, then cluster causes, signals, effects, and mitigations.
Prepare for the work steps
Frame: Clarify initiative and horizon
- Fictional tool-rental context
- Shared observations
Assume: Assume failure
- Fictional tool-rental context
- Shared observations
Surface: Collect reasons independently
- Fictional tool-rental context
- Shared observations
Act: Act on risks
- Fictional tool-rental context
- Shared observations
Follow-up: Agree review and ownership
- Selected actions
- Potential effect signals
Working board
Risks
...
Signals
...
Actions
...
Working policies
Stay hypothetical ...
How to Run Pre-Mortem Exercises | Atlassian
Frame: Clarify initiative and horizon
Expected artifact: Context, goal, horizon
Context, goal, horizon
Entry:
...
- Is the step concrete, safe, and actionable?
Assume: Assume failure
Expected artifact: Hypothetical outcome
Hypothetical outcome
Entry:
...
- Is the step concrete, safe, and actionable?
Surface: Collect reasons independently
Expected artifact: Risks and signals
Risks and signals
Entry:
...
- Is the step concrete, safe, and actionable?
Act: Act on risks
Expected artifact: Mitigation plan
Mitigation plan
Entry:
...
- Is the step concrete, safe, and actionable?
Follow-up: Agree review and ownership
Expected artifact: Agreed follow-up plan
Action · owner · review date · signal · record location
Entry:
...
- Are owner, review date and effect signal clearly agreed?
Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/pre-mortem/run-sheet
Alternatives and neighbors
Fitting alternatives with decision guidance, followed by other related methods.
Business Strategy
Scenario Planning
Instead of Pre-Mortem, when you want to work with multiple future scenarios instead of planning only one course of events.
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Clarifies options, criteria, and risks by framing the initiative or decision, collecting implicit assumptions, and planning tests or research.
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Examines an initiative from an opposing perspective, collects weaknesses, and derives prioritized mitigations.
Decision Making
Impact Filter
Sharpens a planned step through impact, success criteria, and risks down to the smallest sensible move.
Decision Making
Constraint Analysis
Makes hard and soft boundaries visible and turns them into decision rules and option impact notes.
Decision Making
Cynefin Workshop
Sorts cases into the fitting domain and derives actions that match the degree of clarity or complexity.
Constraints and origin
LowWorkshop20–45 min
Profile
- Method form
- Decision method
- Participants
- Small cross-functional group
- Time
- 20–45 min
- Maturity
- Established
- Origin
- Gary Klein
Next up: Risk Matrix