After-Action Review
Response performance analysis and improvement recommendations
Response Score
88/100
Vs. Benchmark
+12%
↑above avg
Improvements
6
Implementation
Q2 2026
Response Performance Scorecard
Solid = Ironclad, Dashed = Industry Average
Response Time vs. Industry Average (hours)
Resolution shown in days (Ironclad 14d vs Industry 45d)
Detection0.5hr vs 2.1hr
Mobilization2.4hr vs 6.8hr
Containment8hr vs 1d
Disclosure18hr vs 2d
Reg Filing2d vs 4d
Resolution14d vs 45d
Ironclad
Industry Average
What Worked
Privilege preservation at 98.6%
Team assembly in 2.4 hours
Containment in 8 hours
All regulatory filings on time
What Needs Improvement
Media response could be faster (T+6h vs T+2h target)
Customer notification process had manual bottlenecks
Insurance claim documentation was incomplete initially
Automate media response
MediumProjected: T+2h response (from T+6h)
Streamline customer notification
LowProjected: 50% faster processing
Pre-stage insurance templates
LowProjected: 90% documentation completeness at T+0
Quarterly tabletop exercises
HighProjected: 15% improvement in readiness scores
Team Performance
| Team Member | Tasks Completed | Avg Response Time | Feedback Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sarah Chen | 14 | 1.2hr | 96 |
| Marcus Webb | 12 | 0.8hr | 94 |
| James Park | 10 | 1.5hr | 91 |
| Diana Torres | 8 | 2.1hr | 88 |
| Raj Patel | 9 | 1.8hr | 85 |
| Emily Nakamura | 7 | 2.4hr | 82 |