The Crisis Simulation After Action Report (AAR) maps team performance directly to the Crisis Exercise Framework. It uses real-time data, team alignment metrics, and a refined scoring methodology to provide actionable, data-driven insights into your crisis readiness and identify high-impact training priorities.

What's New

Faster Feedback Loop

The report updates as participants respond. Once you close the exercise, allow a couple of minutes for the complete dataset to finalize (a banner confirms when all the results are in). Fast feedback helps teams learn and identify training priorities quickly after the simulation ends.

Framework-Aligned Performance

Each inject is now tagged to a crisis phase and scoring is rolled up to show performance against the crisis exercise framework. See exactly which phases your team handles well and which are blind spots. This phase-by-phase view shows you precisely where training will have the most impact.

Refined Scoring with Confidence Adjustments

Participant scoring methodology is now consistent across all playthrough modes and surfaced at different levels of granularity throughout the report; at a phase, inject, and participant level. Each response is scored based on accuracy (adjusted for confidence where enabled), then rolled up across the exercise. This consistency and visibility help you spot high-risk patterns and make more defensible training decisions.

When confidence tracking is enabled, scores are further adjusted to account for real-world risk: a confident correct answer gets full points, while a confident incorrect answer is penalized more heavily than an uncertain one (since confident errors are riskier in real scenarios). This adjustment carries through all rollups where confidence is enabled.

Team Alignment Visibility

The new Participant Alignment metric reveals whether your team is trained and aligned on the same playbook:

• Unified (at least 60% responses in agreement): Indicates a strong shared understanding.
• Split (two dominant views across at least 80% of respondents, where each option has at least 30% of total responses): Shows the team is divided on approach but coherent; consider clarifying procedures.
• Fragmented (neither Unified nor Split): Signals procedural gaps or insufficient training.

Reading Your Report

Metadata & Briefing Controls

• Scenario Briefing Dropdown: A collapsible console at the top of the report allowing coordinators to review the initial scenario context, threat vectors, and objectives at any point.
• Information Metric Bar: Located at the header of the report, this section displays core session metadata:
  • Participants / Assignees: Total number of users who submitted a vote or decision based on the selected mode.
  • Exercised Injects: The number of injects that received at least one active user decision.
  • Phases Exercised: Tracks how many of the eight structural Crisis Exercise Framework phases were actively tested (X/8).
  • Duration & Date: Displays the exact execution date and runtime of the simulation.
  • PDF Export: Provides a direct utility to download and share the full report with executive stakeholders.

⚠️ System Notice: Legacy Report View Retirement

For exercises completed prior to this release, an on-screen blue banner provides a link to access the legacy format. The legacy view will be officially retired in January 2027. Ensure all required historical data is exported to PDF prior to this date.

Performance Overview: Your Headline Numbers

• Participant Score: Measures overall team capability, adjusted for confidence, where confident wrong answers are riskier than uncertain ones. The score is first calculated at an individual response level, before being rolled up by inject and then across the whole exercise. 
• Presenter Selection Score: Shows whether your final decision-maker made sound choices. This score is unique to presentation mode.

The two scores can be read together to give you a strong understanding of what's happening:

• If both are high (at least 66.6%), your team has sharp instincts and strong collaboration.
• If Participant score is high but Presenter score is low, your team is capable but consensus is breaking down.
• If Participant score is low (less than or equal to 33.3%), you're looking at foundational gaps that need training. 

Supporting Metrics

• Participant Accuracy: Replaces the legacy "Decision Score" metric. It measures the raw quality of votes or decisions submitted against established best practices on a standardized scale: Great (100 points), Good (75 points), Okay (50 points), and Weak (25 points). Raw scores are averaged across the exercise and reported as one of three categories: High, Medium or Low based on the following thresholds: High (>66.6%), Medium (>33.3% to <= 66.6%), or Low (<= 33.3%). If option ranking was disabled during scenario creation, an empty state will be displayed.
   
• Participant Confidence: Measures how confident a user felt regarding the decision they made. Maps user selections directly to numerical weights: Very confident (100), Confident (75), Somewhat confident (50), Not very confident (25), and Not at all confident (0). If response confidence was disabled during scenario creation, an empty state will be displayed.
   
• Participant Alignment: Indicates whether your team shares a unified decision-making model. Macro alignment calculates as Unified if >50% of injects are categorized as unified, and Non-Unified if <= 50% of injects are split or fragmented. Alignment only appears in presentation and single player mode; not relevant in drill mode (single respondent per question).
   
• Participation / Completion: Tracks platform engagement metrics based on playthrough mode:
  • Presentation Mode: Measures the average percentage of available votes cast by individual participants.
  • Single Player Mode: Displays the percentage and distribution chart of assigned users who fully completed, partially completed, or have not started the exercise.
  • Team Drill Mode: Not applicable; this metric is hidden from this panel view.

⚠️ System Configuration & Data Dependencies

To unlock the full diagnostic capability of the AAR, specific data parameters are enabled by default during initial scenario configuration. Disabling these settings will impact the metrics and visual charts populated in your report:

Visualizing Performance & Progress

Crisis Framework Heatmap

This heatmap rolls up performance from answered injects tagged to each crisis phase, giving you a clear visual of your team's readiness across your entire response lifecycle. 🟢 Green shows strength, 🟡 amber indicates areas needing work, 🔴 red flags critical gaps, and ⬜ grey reveals phases not exercised within the simulation (potential blind spots).

• If both option ranking and confidence are enabled, phase tiles represent mean risk-adjusted accuracy.
• If only option ranking is enabled, phase tiles display mean question accuracy.
• If only response confidence is enabled, phase tiles display mean user conviction.
• If both parameters are disabled, phase tiles measure if the consensus was unified or non-unified.

Performance Highlights

Surfaces immediate capability wins and vulnerabilities without requiring manual data filtering:

• Areas of Strength: Identifies up to three top-performing injects with a combined accuracy and confidence score above 66.7%.
• Areas for Improvement: Identifies up to three high-risk injects with combined scores at or below 33.3%.

Performance By Inject Scatter Plot

The scatter plot reveals hidden risks at a glance. Injects are plotted individually according to Accuracy (x-axis) and Confidence (y-axis). Injects in the top-left quadrant (high confidence, low accuracy) highlight your highest-risk failure zones where teams are confidently making wrong decisions. The bottom-right quadrant (high accuracy, low confidence) reveals underconfident teams who need reinforcement to trust their judgment.

If either response option ranking or confidence was disabled during scenario creation, an empty state will be displayed.

Performance by Participant Scatter Plot

Plots individual users on an interactive graph by Accuracy (x-axis) and Confidence (y-axis). This enables system administrators to quickly identify low-scoring outliers or overconfident individuals who require targeted skill coaching.

Scenario Performance Trends

A chronological graph visualizing how performance and KPI metrics trended throughout the timeline of the exercise. Units are determined by configuration parameters selected during scenario setup. Available only in Presentation and Team Drill modes.

Granular Reporting Breakdowns

Inject Breakdown Matrix

A complete tabular view of all exercised injects recorded during the session. Each row details:

• The tagged Crisis Exercise Framework phase(s).
• The combined Participant Score (High, Medium, or Low).
• Raw Participant Accuracy percentage.
• Raw Participant Confidence percentage.
• Inject Alignment status (Unified, Split, or Fragmented).
• Presenter Selection classification (Great, Good, Okay, Weak).

Participant Breakdown Matrix

Surfaces user-level accountability based on active playthrough settings:

• Presentation Mode: Surfaces active participants, their percentage-based participation rates, and specific voting actions. Users who log in but do not submit a vote are automatically excluded from data tables.
• Single Player Mode: Displays assignees, individual scoring metrics, and explicit completion states (Completed, In Progress, Not Started). Account names default to Anonymous Account if profiles have been unconfigured or deleted.
• Team Drill Mode: Displays participant identities, core performance scores, and the explicit corporate roles assigned to them during the live simulation.

From Insights to Action

🚨 Low Performance and High Confidence

The most dangerous situation is when your team is confidently wrong. This is your highest-priority retraining target; deploy foundational upskilling immediately and re-exercise to validate.

High Performance, but Low Confidence

Your team knows the answer but doubts themselves. Deploy reinforcement training and positive feedback loops to build confidence.

Fragmented Alignment

Disagreement on the right answer signals unclear procedures or insufficient training. Invest in procedural clarification and policy alignment before the next simulation.

Untested Phases

"Not Exercised" phases are organizational blind spots. Plan exercises to close these gaps; use supplemental training in the interim.

FAQs

Why do my reports look different across presentation, single-player, and drill modes?

Each playthrough mode captures different data, so the report adjusts to highlight what is relevant.

• Presentation mode captures initial responses from the participants in the room, as well as the final selection made by the presenter. Features unique to presentation mode are the Presenter Selection Score (giving visibility into team capability vs leadership decisions) and the Participation KPI (based on responses through companion app). The Participant Alignment KPI is also surfaced in presentation mode, indicating response alignment across individual injects.
• Single Player mode captures responses from the participants working through a scenario independently. A feature unique to single player mode is the Scenario Completion KPI (this surfaces completion across assignees). The Participant Alignment KPI is also surfaced in single player mode, indicating response alignment across individual injects.
• Team Drill mode captures performance across a scenario, where each role is responsible for answering injects assigned to them. In team drills, there is no alignment or participation/completion KPI as these are not applicable.

Why do some crisis phases show "Not Exercised" when I included questions tagged to them?

Only injects with participant responses contribute to phase rollups. Not all injects get answered in a given scenario: questions may be skipped, not reached within the exercise timeframe, or sit on branching paths participants didn't take. If no one answered any injects tagged to a phase, that phase appears as ‘Not Exercised’ rather than affecting the phase score.

Phases will also appear as ‘Not Exercised’ when inject tagging was disabled during scenario creation, and if injects were not tagged against any phases.