How to Handle Blame in Project Post-Mortems

Do you want to know who to blame, or do you want to understand what went wrong so you can fix it? The answer should be obvious, but when things go wrong, it can be much easier to start pointing fingers. In the Navy, we used “near miss reporting” to understand the root cause of any failures. This no-fault reporting structure was a way to bring together different people to understand how something happened, rather than who was to blame, and then to figure out how to remedy the situation going forward. If this process works for something as important as a nuclear reactor or a submarine, it can certainly work just as well in the business world. We use this same concept of “near miss reporting” at RightHand Robotics, Inc. If something goes wrong, we conduct post-mortems to identify the root cause of the issue and to construct effective solutions. Maybe that means creating a new process, or maybe it means eliminating a broken process that isn’t working anymore. Either way, we focus on finding a solution rather than finding someone to blame. That same examination process works when things go right. We can figure out why something worked well and determine how to replicate that in the future for better results. My experience with post-mortems in the Navy taught me that continued growth isn’t about pointing fingers. It’s about pointing out potential solutions. This concept has worked for us at RightHand Robotics again and again.

Sometimes, when everything is going to hell in a handbasket, the easy route is to look for someone to blame. I know I can't be the only one who's had who's played the blame game... Here’s the thing—blame is irrelevant. Solving the problem is all that matters. You want to fix the problem? Here’s what I try to do… Key word: try. (Hey, I’m human!) 1. Separate the People from the Problem ✓ Don’t let personal attachments cloud the issue. ✓ Acknowledge emotions, but steer the conversation toward facts and objectives. 2. Clarify define the problem simply ✓ "A problem well stated is a problem half solved." – Charles Kettering ✓ Shift the focus from "Who is right?" to "What is right?" 3. Control the Narrative ✓ Stay calm. Frame the issue as a team challenge, not a personal battle. 4. Engage in Collaborative Problem-Solving ✓ Encourage all perspectives. ✓ Use data, logic, and reasoning over opinions. ✓ Make sure everyone feels heard—it reduces resistance. (This is HUGE!) 5. Align on Action Steps & Hold Accountability ✓ Summarize decisions clearly. ✓ Assign tasks based on strengths, not egos or blame. ✓ Set follow-ups to track progress. At the end of the day, it’s not about who caused the problem—it’s about who’s willing to fix it. Leaders don’t waste time pointing fingers. They take responsibility, rally the team, and get it done. What do you think? How do you handle tough situations when egos get in the way

Leadership can really shine during high-stakes retrospectives (a.k.a. postmortems). Teams get worried immediately following major failures, like a total outage. Customers are upset, company perception is impacted, and teams feel down. Times like that demand a leader who can simultaneously show stability, encourage transparent discussion, and steer the team toward productive resolutions. One of the most crucial initial steps is creating an environment where root causes can be identified. If you have ever been in one of these high pressure situations, you will know that they are often multi-dimensional, including a set of unforeseen conditions, lack of communication, insufficient process, and cross-functional elements. Right from the start, the leader should make it clear that the retros purpose is learning and prevention, not blame. Underscore a non-judgmental atmosphere, “We’re here to identify where we could have done better, not to single out individuals.” This tone encourages the team to share insights and challenges, ultimately leading to a deeper discussion. Beyond setting the tone, a leader should actively model the behaviors they wish to see: action, curiosity, improvement. When groups are knocked off their center, the leader plays a critical role to reunify the group and being laser-focused on finding paths forward. You can ask: What signals did we miss? Did we fail to communicate certain risks? Which assumptions proved false? Highlighting systematic or procedural gaps rather than individual errors fosters a sense of collective responsibility for solutions. Last, clear follow-through is important. Tell the team what you expect at the end of the retrospective: well-defined action items with assigned owners and timelines. Hopefully, you already have a documented process for retros. You can point to this and reiterate that the outcomes will be real changes that focus on the current failure, but importantly, prevention of the class of potential failures. While it’s necessary to provide an accurate account of what went wrong, it’s just as important to convey a measured plan for preventing a recurrence. During the period when all of the answers are not known, leaders often need to provide teams protection and time to make recommendations. If you do these things well, a leader can transform a moment of failure into a more resilient and proactive team.

It was 3:42 AM. A junior data engineer had just deployed an update to a core ETL pipeline. Minutes later, critical data jobs started failing, no reports were loading, dashboards were blank, execs across 5 time zones started pinging Slack. Panicked, he called the on-call senior. His first words were exactly, “I think I broke something in the latest DAG. Data isn’t moving. I’m really sorry, it’s on me. How should we tackle this?” The senior didn’t say: → “Did you not test locally?” → “Why didn’t you follow the migration checklist?” → “This is why we don’t deploy at night.” Instead, he said: “Breathe. I’m here.” Within 15 minutes, they had looped in another data engineer and the analytics lead. They spun up a staging pipeline, checked data snapshots, and started tracing the failure. By morning, the pipeline was fixed. No critical data was lost. The dashboards were live before the CEO even noticed. Was it a serious incident? Absolutely. Could it have been avoided? Most likely. But it was also a huge learning moment. No one sent blame emails. No one asked for “accountability reports.” In the post-mortem, here’s what was said: When production’s on fire, it’s not about who to blame. It’s about who steps up, who calls for help, and who’s willing to fix it together. He flagged the issue early, owned up, and asked for backup. That’s what you want in a teammate. Mistakes will happen. Even in big data. Even with your most careful plans. But when someone tells you the pipeline’s on fire at 3 AM, → Don’t make them feel smaller. → Hand them a playbook, not a punishment. Lessons come after. First, you help put out the fire. That’s real data engineering leadership. That’s what I’ve learned leading teams in the trenches as a Senior Engineer

It’s easy to look back and point fingers when something goes wrong. Blame can feel like a natural response when you’re frustrated or under pressure. But here’s the thing... blame doesn’t solve problems. Real progress comes when we stop assigning fault and start focusing on the solution. It’s about stepping back, asking, “What’s the problem? What are our options? What’s the plan to move forward?” That shift in mindset is powerful... but in the heat of the moment, it’s not always easy. I saw this approach in action during my time helping coach high school football. The head coach was a phenomenal leader. State championships, scholarships for players, you name it. One of the biggest lessons I learned from him was how he handled mistakes. In football, you lose because of a handful of plays. Five at most. After every loss, we’d review the film. The mistakes were obvious... sometimes it was a coaching issue, sometimes a player’s execution. But the coach never blamed one person, one play, or one decision. Instead, he focused on teaching. What could we learn from those mistakes? How could we adjust for the next game? Once we learned the lessons, we moved on. The focus shifted immediately to preparing for the next opponent and solving the new problems they would throw at us. At Infinitive, we approach our work the same way. We review projects, identify what went wrong, and learn from those moments. But we don’t dwell on mistakes or assign blame. Instead, we focus on how to do better next time... on how to move forward. Blameless problem solving isn’t just about avoiding conflict. It’s about creating a culture of learning, resilience, and progress. That’s how you build great teams, great projects, and great outcomes. So the next time something goes wrong, ask yourself... are you focusing on the problem, or are you stuck in the past? The answer makes all the difference.