incidents

A war story with no learning in it scores zero, however dramatic. The five beats of an incident narrative, the decision under uncertainty that is the actual subject of the question, and how to tell it when the incident was somebody else's fault.

Everyone has this story and most candidates tell a flattering version of it. The bias that produces almost all of these mistakes, the cost you have to be willing to name, and the process change that is the difference between an anecdote and a lesson.

Most postmortem documents are written, filed and never read again. The three parts that decide whether one changes anything, why action items without a named owner and a date are decoration, and the meeting rule that keeps blamelessness from becoming vagueness.

Taking the keyboard teaches nothing and is the reflex under pressure. The handoff that works, the four questions that make someone's reasoning visible, and the point at which you stop asking questions and take over.

The first move is not technical. It is deciding who runs what, because one person serially debugging three incidents is slower than three people in parallel and much slower than one person coordinating. The ordering rule, and the two things that outrank everything else.