Spaker Panel - Day 2
summary
Panelists argue for concrete evidence and prototypes: a curated learning-from-incidents website to share structured cases, instrumented chaos experiments that produce repeatable data, and decision-support UIs that surface the exact signals operators need. They show why functional redundancy not component redundancy matters with Challenger/Blackhawk/NASA anecdotes, push scenario-planning for nightmare cases as a design exercise, and critique token postmortems, gatekeeping, and unverifiable self-blame.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (10)
- 0:00Panel introduction
- 0:43Resilience engineering aids chaos
- 2:44Redundancy vs functional resilience
- 6:23Resilience beyond postmortems
- 12:36Defining resilience engineering
- 21:03Gatekeeping vs common ground
- 30:31No-blame cultures in incidents
- 41:03Automation lessons from 737 MAX
- 49:11Teams and systems resilience
- 54:18Closing remarks
related talks
49mSpeaker Panel - Day 1
27mLive Q&A with Speakers – Marina Fisher
48mChaos Engineering Panel
40mBuilding Resilience: How to Learn More from Incidents
52mPanel Discussion
21mLive Q&A Session #1
29mLearning from incidents: how things went right
50mLearning in Production (or Why the Apollo 11 Landing Nearly Failed)
