pre-mortem

name	pre-mortem
description	Runs a Klein pre-mortem on a project — assumes it already failed, brainstorms why, scores each failure mode by likelihood × impact, and attaches a mitigation plus an early-warning signal to the top risks. Use when launching a feature, kicking off a quarter, or before a big bet and you want to ask "imagine this shipped and flopped — what killed it?" or "where is this most likely to go wrong?"
tier	guided
time	30-45 min
inputs	the plan, the date, and who's involved
outputs	projects/<project>/pre-mortem.md

Pre-Mortem

A pre-mortem (Gary Klein) flips a postmortem forward in time: you assume the project has already failed, then work backward to explain why. This "prospective hindsight" frames failure as a given, which licenses honest, specific concerns that optimism normally suppresses — and turns them into mitigations before they cost you anything.

Grounded in: Performing a Project Premortem (HBR) — Gary Klein: assume it failed, list why, rate likelihood × impact, mitigate the top modes. Go deeper (The Product Channel): 6 Fatal Mistakes to Avoid

When to use this

• You're about to commit to a launch, migration, or large bet and want to stress-test it before sinking resources.
• The plan feels suspiciously smooth and nobody is raising objections in the room.
• Kicking off a quarter or epic where the cost of a wrong assumption is high.
• A senior stakeholder asked "what could go wrong?" and you want more than a hand-wavy risk slide.
• You've seen similar projects fail before and want to name the pattern before it repeats.

Before you start (gather these)

• The project + its definition of success: what's shipping, by when, and the specific metric/outcome that means it worked.
• The plan or approach: how you intend to get there (key milestones, dependencies, owners).
• Stakeholders and constraints: who's involved, the deadline, budget, team capacity, technical or political constraints.

If two or more of these are missing or vague, ASK 2–4 sharp clarifying questions before generating anything — e.g., "What's the single metric that defines success here?", "What's the hard deadline and what's driving it?", "What's the riskiest dependency you're relying on?", "Has a project like this failed here before — how?" If the data is already provided, proceed and state your assumptions inline.

Process

Run the critic brief from WORKERS.md. This host has no subagents, so you cannot get a genuinely independent read inside this session. Do it anyway — the brief is worth following — but label the result a self-review, not an independent critique, and tell the user how to get the real thing: a fresh session with the artifact pasted in alone. Send the plan to critic and ask specifically for the load-bearing assumption and every fatal finding. A pre-mortem run inside the context that built the plan reliably imagines the failures the team already worries about, and misses the one nobody has thought of.

1. Set the failure frame. Write one sentence: "It is [date past the deadline]. The project has failed completely." Be concrete about what "failed" looks like against the success metric — not "it went poorly" but "we shipped 6 weeks late and adoption never crossed 5%."
2. Brainstorm failure modes wide, then specific. Generate 8–15 distinct reasons it failed. Force coverage across categories so you don't over-index on the obvious: scope/execution, team/capacity, dependencies/tech, market/user demand, stakeholder/political, data/measurement, external/timing. Each one is a complete causal sentence, not a label. Two modes are distinct only if they have a different root cause — not just a different symptom. "Adoption stalled because onboarding was confusing" and "adoption stalled because the value prop was unclear" are distinct (different causes); "adoption stalled in week 1" and "adoption stalled in week 4" are the same mode (one cause, two symptoms) — merge them.
3. Score each by likelihood × impact. Rate likelihood (1–5: how plausible this actually happens) and impact (1–5: how badly it sinks the project if it does). Multiply for a risk score (1–25). Resist flattening everything to 3s — spread the ratings.
4. Rank and draw the line. Sort by score. The Top tier is capped at 5: take every mode scoring ≥12, but if more than 5 qualify, keep only the 5 highest and demote the rest to Watch. Tie-break (when scores are equal): rank the higher-impact mode first; if impact also ties, the higher-likelihood mode wins. Everything below the line is logged but not actively managed.
5. Attach a mitigation + early-warning signal to each top risk. For every top risk: (a) a concrete preventive action with an owner, and (b) an early-warning signal — the specific, observable, leading indicator that tells you this failure is starting to materialize while there's still time to act.
6. Name a trigger and a tripwire. For the highest risks, decide in advance: if the warning signal fires, what's the predefined response? Pre-committing the reaction removes the in-the-moment hesitation.
7. Assign and date. Every mitigation gets an owner and a check-in date. A pre-mortem with no owners is a venting session, not a risk plan.

Output template

# Pre-Mortem: [Project Name]

**Date of exercise:** [today]
**Success defined as:** [specific metric/outcome + deadline]
**Failure frame:** It is [date past deadline]. The project failed — [concrete description of what failure looks like].
**Measurement & launch bar:** Pre-registered primary metric: [the single metric committed to *before* launch]. Control/holdout design: [how you isolate the effect — A/B split, holdout %, pre/post baseline]. Quality gate: [quantified pass threshold, e.g. "precision ≥ 0.85 on the eval set" or "p95 latency < 200ms"].

## Failure modes (ranked)

| # | Failure mode (why it failed) | Category | Likelihood (1–5) | Impact (1–5) | Score | Tier |
|---|------------------------------|----------|:---:|:---:|:---:|------|
| 1 | [Causal sentence — what specifically went wrong] | [Execution/Demand/Dependency/Team/Stakeholder/Data/External] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | Top |
| 2 | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | Top |
| 3 | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | Top |
| 4 | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | Watch |
| ... | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | Watch |

_Tier: Top = actively mitigated (score ≥12, capped at the 5 highest; ties broken by impact, then likelihood). Watch = logged, monitored, not actively managed._

## Top risks — mitigation & early warning

### Risk 1: [Failure mode] — Score [ ]
- **Why it's plausible:** [1 line grounding the likelihood]
- **Mitigation:** [concrete preventive action]
- **Early-warning signal:** [specific, observable, leading indicator — e.g. "design review slips past [date]" or "week-1 activation < X%"]
- **Tripwire → response:** If [signal fires], then [pre-committed action, e.g. cut scope to X, escalate to Y].
- **Owner:** [name] · **Check by:** [date]

### Risk 2: [Failure mode] — Score [ ]
- **Why it's plausible:** [ ]
- **Mitigation:** [ ]
- **Early-warning signal:** [ ]
  If [ ], then [ ].
  [ ] ·  [ ]


  [ ]
  [ ]
  [ ]
  If [ ], then [ ].
  [ ] ·  [ ]


 [Failure mode] — early-warning signal: [ ]
 [Failure mode] — early-warning signal: [ ]


 [Concrete change to scope, sequence, staffing, or timeline made  of a risk above]
 [ ]


 [ ] — revisit signals and re-score after [milestone/date].

Avoid (anti-patterns)

• Vague failure modes. "Bad execution" or "lack of resources" can't be mitigated. Force a causal sentence: what failed, because of what.
• All-3s scoring. If every risk scores 9, you haven't prioritized — you've made a list. Spread likelihood and impact deliberately so a true top tier emerges. Distribution heuristic: no more than ~40% of modes should share a single score, and at least one mode should land in each band — low (1–6), mid (8–12), high (15–25). If the spread violates this, you're flattening; re-score.
• Lagging signals dressed as early warnings. "Adoption was low at launch" is a postmortem fact, not an early warning. The signal must be observable before the failure is locked in (e.g., "beta opt-in rate < 20% three weeks out").
• Mitigations with no owner or date. Unowned actions are wishes. Every top risk needs a name and a check-in date.
• Mitigating everything. Spreading effort across 12 risks dilutes all of them. Draw the line and let the watch list be watched, not worked.

Tips

• Run the brainstorm silently first. With a group, have each person write failure modes alone for 5 minutes before sharing — it kills groupthink and surfaces the concern the most junior person was afraid to say. Solo or AI-run: there's no room to silence, so manufacture the diversity instead — cycle through distinct stakeholder lenses one at a time (engineering, CS/support, security, finance, exec/leadership, the churned user) and ask "how does this fail from their seat?" Each lens tends to surface a failure mode the others miss.
• Mine real history. "Has something like this failed here before?" is the single highest-yield question. Past failure patterns are the most likely future ones.
• Pre-commit the tripwire response. Deciding the reaction now, while calm, beats deciding it mid-crisis when sunk cost and politics distort judgment.
• Time-box it. A sharp pre-mortem is 45–60 minutes. The goal is to surface the top 3–5 risks and act, not to enumerate every conceivable mishap.