The pre-mortem template, and what it is really for

The short answer

The pre-mortem template

Send this as a written prompt before anyone meets. Independent answers first, discussion second.

1. 1

   The prompt

   It is [date, six to twelve months out]. We committed to [project] and it failed. Looking back, there were early signals. What were they?

2. 2

   Answer alone, in writing

   Every participant responds independently before the group talks. Discussing first produces conformity and the most useful signal never gets said out loud.

3. 3

   Also run it in reverse

   Ask the same question about succeeding. Backcasting plus pre-mortem gives you both the roadmap and the risks; either alone is half a picture.

4. 4

   Separate what you control

   Sort every factor into within your control and outside it. Only the first list is actionable; the second is what you monitor.

5. 5

   Convert each signal into a criterion

   Turn the signal into a measurable condition with a date, then attach the action: kill, pivot, or a specific test that resolves it.

The cited playbook

How to run it so it changes something

The difference between a pre-mortem that works and one that does not is entirely in what happens after the list.

1. 1

   Treat the pre-mortem as a signal generator, not a plan review

   Annie Duke's observation is that running a pre-mortem generally does not change the plan much. Its real value is the list of things you would observe on the way down, because each of those can become a pre-committed exit condition. Run it to find signals, not to feel thorough.

   Annie Duke · Annie Duke on Lenny's Podcast
2. 2

   Collect answers independently before anyone speaks

   Duke uses nominal group technique for exactly this. When discovery and discussion happen in the same room at the same time, the first confident voice anchors everyone else and the quietest useful signal is never raised. Written, independent answers first, then discuss the combined list.

   Annie Duke · Annie Duke, Lenny's Podcast interview
3. 3

   Pair it with a backcast so you get a roadmap too

   Backcasting imagines the same future date with the project succeeding, and works backward to what made it happen. Duke's framing is that the two are complements: a pre-mortem alone breeds pessimism without direction, a backcast alone breeds false confidence. Run both, then sort every factor by whether you control it.

   Annie Duke · Annie Duke, Thinking in Bets
4. 4

   Convert every signal into a kill criterion with an action

   A signal with no attached response is a discussion. Duke's worked example with a sales team turned three pre-mortem signals into standing rules, including killing any deal where the buyer refuses a demo and only wants to talk price. Give each criterion a metric, a date, and a committed action.

   Annie Duke · Annie Duke on Lenny's Podcast

Where experts disagree

Where operators disagree: what is the exercise actually for?

Both are right about different stages. Parrish's version belongs before you choose, when options are still open. Duke's belongs once the choice is effectively made and the remaining question is what would make you reverse it. Running only Parrish leaves you with no exit condition; running only Duke means you never questioned the plan.

What founders say

What founders actually say

Verbatim user quotes from public forums, sourced, not paraphrased.

FAQ

Pre-mortem questions, answered

Related guides

Keep exploring