Sunday, 23 January 2011 00:00

Is Your Failure Rate High Enough for Success?

Rate this item
(0 votes)

The other day, while playing with my nine-month old Granddaughter, I counted the number of times she tried to do something and failed. If I had that much trouble, I would give up. Then I reflected on how many successes she has ever hour. Day by day, she changes—in a marked way. Making new sounds, crawling, climbing, signing, putting toys together, they are all big steps. She repeatedly tries until she gets it right, resulting in more successes in a day than I have in a week... maybe a month, even though she fails at more things in an hour than I do in a year. Maybe, if I were to increase my number of failures, successes would skyrocket.

Averting Failure

As adults, we look upon failure as a bad thing. We avoid it like the plague. It is embarrassing. In business, it can be a firing offense. However, if we all stay in our comfort zone insuring that we succeed, where is the seed for new ideas and innovation? As individuals and companies, we look at risk as something for minimizing. Instead, it needs managing. We should have a failure quota to meet, falling short of that measure means we are not trying hard enough.

This concept is more than learning from our mistakes, it is stepping out our comfort zone into area of known risk in order to get higher returns. After achieving success, we must repeatedly push our bounds to create more failures in search of even loftier goals. This requires leadership that tolerates, or even celebrates, the right kind of failure—failure as part of a plan to move the company forward in new and bold ways.

Entrepreneurs do this daily. It is their lifeblood. They focus on the rewards of success. A lightweight, agile, entrepreneurial company can maintain this focus. However, carrying this mindset into a company beholden to stockholders is difficult and the desire to make short-term profits often drowns out the lure of risky innovation.

The Gray Line Between Success And Failure

Traffic Sign For Allowing Failure

Success is more than a state; it is a mindset. It requires the optimism to look at setbacks differently. As with other great discoveries, rarely is success announced with the cry, "Eureka!" It all too often it is found in a puzzled and mumbled whisper, "Hmm, that's odd." This is surely the view of the people that developed a drug called Sildenafil® in the late 1980s. The goal of the drug was to help with hypertension and later was tested on patients with heart disease to reduce angina. Trials failed to support the researcher's claims. Did they stop there? No. They redirected their studies on the side effects recorded in males. In short, Pfizer patented and trademarked Sildenafil as Viagra® in 1991. The rest of the story is well known. These reports repeat for 3M's super glue failure producing Post-it® notes and Thomas Edison's purported testing of a thousand filaments to settle on his final carbon blend.

Failure Quota

Aggressively growing businesses need failures along with their successes. Accepting failures, even celebrating them, are part of pushing the envelope and creating an environment where people will take calculated risks. It is the source of innovation and growth. The attitude empowers employees to develop new products and reach new customers. Without embracing failure as part of business, companies will lose market share and become yesterday's news.

Lessons From The Pro

Take a lesson from the professionals—children that relentlessly take chances in order to try something new. Understand the risk and take the chance, it will only hurt if there is nothing learned from the endeavor. The rewards for reaching just a little farther, trying a little harder, and stepping out of your comfort zone may be the best thing you can do for you and your company.

Read 8893 times

Related items

  • Process Mapping

    Process is at the core of any business. It makes work predictable, repeatable, and transferable. Without it we cannot scale our businesses. However, process can be a bane to making progress. Processes that work for a $10 million company have difficulties supporting a $30 million company. Trying to scale them to a $300 million company will not only fail but not address the issues that larger companies have that were never dreamt of in a smaller organization. Processes need to be discarded, revamped, and built—all of that without creating an overburdening bureaucracy.

    Anytime you need to go someplace, you first have to know where you are. Processes are never static and your company's current state is probably far from where you think it is. Hence, the first step is mapping out you company's current state followed by defining the future state. This is more than a logical map of the process; it must also include physical maps. Whether your process is solely to provide a service (say, website development) or physical (say, manufacturing) there are logistical issues that complicate the process flow. Without fully understanding those nuances, future state processes will not reach the desired efficiencies.

    For more information about process mapping fill out the form to the left and we will get in touch with you.

  • Success vs Culture

    The other day a Latvian student contacted me for my views the connection between culture and success criteria—an important and intriguing topic. After working in Taiwan, Singapore, Korea, Japan, Israel, United States, and Canada, I wear many scars of both blatant and subtle cultural violations. I also know that within a culture one person's success is often another person's failure. So, after dispelling concerns about clicking on some random email link, I completed her survey (please feel free to take it yourself). In the process, I struck up a friendship with the student, Kristine Briežkalne, who is studying at Riga International School of Economics and Business Administration . She has some interesting views and presented me with a Venn diagram showing four frames to a project (business, client, project management, and growth perspectives) and how they intersected. As the diagram is part of her Master's thesis, I will let you ponder the how to label the overlapping areas (an eye-opening exercise).

  • Kill The White Knight

    There is a reason we do not teach classes on fixing failing projects. Many a cynic feels that we simply do not want to teach our trade, however, our reason is far nobler—we should be teaching prevention rather trying to create white knights to save the day. It is the same philosophy as building a fence at the cliff's edge rather than an emergency room at its base. Our language is replete with idioms telling us to look past the symptom and address problems at their root cause. 'An ounce of prevention versus a pound of cure' or 'a stitch in time saves nine.' Please, feel free to supply your own in the comments. Unfortunately, most of our businesses loathe this philosophy, waiting to address an issue until it is irrefutably broken.

  • Tales of an Expert Witness: Sex, Lies, and Video Tape (Part II)

    Trust relationships, certifications, and standards sound like such a safe harbor. These sound like such great words in a proposal or statement of work. How could you possibly go wrong building a trusted relationship with a customer by committing to follow a standard? In fact, this can burn you… in court.

    No one ever starts a project with the goal of ending up in court. In fact, litigation may never cross your mind; after all, you have built a trusted partner relationship. Taking a few cautionary steps, however, will make your life easier if you end up in that ill-fated litigious position. Your best chances for success come long before you enter the courtroom—even before the project starts.

  • Comparing Organizational Change Management Models

    A few weeks ago, I set out to write a post on the comparison of various organizational change management (OCM) methodologies and realized that would be a disservice to my readers. It would simply drag you down the path of implementation while failing to focus you on building the foundation. The pressure was too much and I have relented to numerous requests on making that comparison. The caveat is that juxtaposing these models is not comparing different varieties of oranges or even apples and oranges; we are surely comparing the peel to the fruit they contain. Hence, comparing methodologies like Kotter's model (the peel), Prosci's ADKAR (the core), and General Electric's Change Acceleration Process (the whole fruit) need a different approach.

Leave a comment

More Info on Project Recovery

Tell me More!

Please send me more information
on fixing a failing project.

Rescue The Problem Project

Internationally acclaimed

Image of RPP

For a signed and personalized copy in the US visit the our eCommerce website.

Amazon logo
Buy it in the United States Buy it in Canada Buy it in the United Kingdom
Buy it in Ireland Buy it in Germany Buy it in France
Buy it in Italy Buy it in the PRC
Buy it in Japan
Book sellers worldwide.

Upcoming Events

Other's References

Sitemap