← All templates

Incident Postmortem

Review a software incident without blame using customer impact, a timestamped timeline, contributing factors, and verifiable follow-up actions.

Use this template
Preview

Incident Postmortem: [Incident title]

Field Value
Incident ID [Reference]
Severity [Level using your team’s definitions]
Status Draft / In review / Final
Incident lead [Name]
Review owner [Name]
Start / end [Timestamps with timezone]
Affected systems [Services and regions]
Related links [Incident channel, dashboards, tickets]

Summary

[State what happened, the user-visible effect, how service was restored, and the current state. Separate verified facts from hypotheses.]

Customer and business impact

  • Affected users or tenants: [Count or estimate, with source.]
  • Affected operations: [Failed, delayed, or degraded workflows.]
  • Duration: [Impact window, distinct from investigation duration.]
  • Data impact: [Confirmed loss, corruption, exposure, or no evidence found; state remaining uncertainty.]
  • Communication: [Who was notified, when, and where.]

Timeline

Use one timezone throughout: [UTC or named timezone].

Time Event or observation Action and result Evidence
[Timestamp] [First known impact] [Action, if any] [Logs or metrics]
[Timestamp] [Detection or report] [Triage started] [Alert or ticket]
[Timestamp] [Mitigation attempted] [Observed result] [Deployment or command record]
[Timestamp] [Service restored] [Recovery verified] [Health checks]

Detection and response

How we detected it: [Alert, support report, or manual observation.]

Detection gaps: [Why earlier signals did not lead to action.]

Response constraints: [Access, documentation, tooling, or coordination issues.]

Causes and contributing factors

Factor Supporting evidence Role in the incident
[Trigger] [Verified evidence] [How impact began]
[System condition] [Verified evidence] [How impact spread or persisted]
[Process condition] [Verified evidence] [Why safeguards did not catch it]

Unresolved hypotheses: [What remains unknown and how it will be investigated.]

Recovery and validation

[Describe the mitigation, why it worked, how recovery was verified, and any temporary measures still in place.]

What worked and what needs improvement

  • Worked well: [Effective safeguard or response practice.]
  • Needs improvement: [Specific system or process gap.]

Follow-up actions

ID Action Type Owner Due date Verification Tracking link
A-01 [Reduce likelihood of recurrence] Prevention [Name] [Date] [Test or observable outcome] [Issue]
A-02 [Improve detection or recovery] Detection / mitigation [Name] [Date] [Exercise or measurement] [Issue]

Review and closure