For facilitators
Facilitator guide
How to prepare the case library and run each live session.
Materials and facilitator prep
Most prep goes into building a case library; once built, it can be reused for every cohort.
- Collect 6–10 internal postmortems and turn them into step-by-step incident replays
- Build 8 PRs with planted flaws, each with an answer key and severity ranking
- Write 40 calibration scenarios with known outcomes (20 for week 1, 20 for week 8)
- Pick 2–3 past architecture decisions and line up their original owners for week 6
- Record 4–6 senior engineers thinking aloud through cases (15–20 minutes each)
- Prepare 3 no-AI katas with reference solutions
- Recruit capstone panelists and confirm managers support each learner’s capstone decision
- Set up a shared confidence-log template
Plan for about 60–80 hours of upfront prep, then 4–5 hours per week per facilitator while the course runs.
On this site, the shared confidence-log template is the My log page: learners’ logs live in their own browsers, and they export JSON when you need to see them.
Session run-sheet
Every live session uses the same 90-minute shape. Adjust the middle block per week.
| Time | Block | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| 0–10 | Check-in | One learner shares a decision from their week and what they’d now do differently. |
| 10–15 | Frame | State the week’s goal and the one skill being practised. Remind learners: commit before reveal, no AI. |
| 15–70 | Core exercise | The week’s exercise (see below). Keep reveals short; spend the time on reasoning. |
| 70–85 | Debrief | Where did the room disagree? What signal settled it? What would have changed your mind? |
| 85–90 | Async brief | Walk through the async work and the deliverable for the week. |
Per week:
- Week 1: Run the 20 scenarios at about 2 minutes each. Learners commit on the case pages, then you reveal together. Don’t discuss until everyone has committed.
- Week 2: Learners review the PR silently for 15 minutes, then compare findings in pairs before the answer key.
- Week 3: No AI, no laptops for the first 20 minutes. Paper or whiteboard only.
- Week 4: Split into teams of 3–4. Each team gets 30 minutes to write a design, then 5 minutes to argue for it. Reveal the real system’s history last.
- Week 5: Incident replay (see below).
- Week 6: Learners predict the original reasoning before the decision-maker speaks. The guest answers questions; they don’t present.
- Week 7: Each learner gets 5 minutes to pitch and 5 minutes of feedback on framing only, not on the answer.
- Week 8: Panels (see below).
Running an incident replay
An incident replay works when learners feel the uncertainty the on-call engineer felt.
- Prepare the stages. Split the postmortem’s timeline into 3–5 stages. Each stage gives only what the responders could see at that moment: alerts, a graph, a log line, what a teammate said.
- Cut the hindsight. Remove every sentence that explains the cause. If the stage text tells learners what matters, the stage is too generous.
- Ask the same question each stage: “What do you check next, and why?” Learners write a note before anyone speaks. The case page enforces this: the next stage stays locked until the note is saved.
- Collect hypotheses out loud. Write them on a shared board with a rough likelihood. Ask what evidence would rule each one out.
- Reveal the next stage and ask which hypotheses got stronger or weaker.
- Reveal the outcome last, then play or read the senior commentary.
- Debrief the process, not the answer. Who narrowed fastest, and what did they look at? Where did the room chase a symptom?
Keep it blameless. Talk about conditions and decisions, never about the people in the original incident.
Running capstone panels
The week 8 panel tests whether a learner can defend a decision under friendly but real scrutiny.
- Panel: 2–3 senior engineers who weren’t involved in the learner’s decision. Send them the proposal 3 days ahead.
- Format: 15 minutes per learner: 3 minutes of summary, 10 minutes of questions, 2 minutes for the panel to note scores.
- Questions to prepare: “What did you give up?”, “What’s the hardest part to undo?”, “What would make you change your mind?”, “How would this fail in six months?”
- Scoring: Each panelist scores the reasoning rubric independently, then they compare. Big gaps between panelists are worth a short conversation before the scores go back to the learner.
- Feedback: Written feedback within a week, one strength and one thing to practise next.
Panelists should push back on reasoning, not on taste. “I’d have picked X” isn’t feedback unless they can say what X buys.