HBR Digital Article. By Morgan Simon ,. View Details. By Richard Davis ,. Partner Article. By Douglas Stone , Sheila Heen ,. HBR Article. By Isabelle Royer ,. By Herminia Ibarra ,. Copyright Permissions If you'd like to share this PDF, you can purchase copyright permissions by increasing the quantity. Order for your team and save! Early on, she invited people to reflect on their recent experiences in caring for patients: Was everything as safe as they would have wanted it to be?
This helped them recognize that the hospital had room for improvement. Suddenly, people were lining up to help. Paradoxically, people feel psychologically safer when leaders are clear about what acts are blameworthy. And there must be consequences. But if someone is punished or fired, tell those directly and indirectly affected what happened and why it warranted blame.
They also may approach failure in a way that is inappropriate for the context. For example, statistical process control, which uses data analysis to assess unwarranted variances, is not good for catching and correcting random invisible glitches such as software bugs. Nor does it help in the development of creative new products. Often one context or one kind of work dominates the culture of an enterprise and shapes how it treats failure.
For instance, automotive companies, with their predictable, high-volume operations, understandably tend to view failure as something that can and should be prevented.
But most organizations engage in all three kinds of work discussed above—routine, complex, and frontier. Leaders must ensure that the right approach to learning from failure is applied in each. All organizations learn from failure through three essential activities: detection, analysis, and experimentation. Spotting big, painful, expensive failures is easy. The goal should be to surface it early, before it has mushroomed into disaster.
Shortly after arriving from Boeing to take the reins at Ford, in September , Alan Mulally instituted a new system for detecting failures. He asked managers to color code their reports green for good, yellow for caution, or red for problems—a common management technique.
After that, the weekly staff meetings were full of color. That story illustrates a pervasive and fundamental problem: Although many methods of surfacing current and pending failures exist, they are grossly underutilized. Total Quality Management and soliciting feedback from customers are well-known techniques for bringing to light failures in routine operations. High-reliability-organization HRO practices help prevent catastrophic failures in complex systems like nuclear power plants through early detection.
Such methods are not more widely employed because all too many messengers—even the most senior executives—remain reluctant to convey bad news to bosses and colleagues. One senior executive I know in a large consumer products company had grave reservations about a takeover that was already in the works when he joined the management team. But, overly conscious of his newcomer status, he was silent during discussions in which all the other executives seemed enthusiastic about the plan.
Many months later, when the takeover had clearly failed, the team gathered to review what had happened. Aided by a consultant, each executive considered what he or she might have done to contribute to the failure. It turned out that the behavior of midlevel managers—how they responded to failures and whether they encouraged open discussion of them, welcomed questions, and displayed humility and curiosity—was the cause. I have seen the same pattern in a wide range of organizations.
Roberto, Richard M. Bohmer, and Amy C. Edmondson, HBR November Ironically, a shared but unsubstantiated belief among program managers that there was little they could do contributed to their inability to detect the failure.
Postevent analyses suggested that they might indeed have taken fruitful action. One challenge is teaching people in an organization when to declare defeat in an experimental course of action. The human tendency to hope for the best and try to avoid failure at all costs gets in the way, and organizational hierarchies exacerbate it. Intuition may tell engineers or scientists that a project has fatal flaws, but the formal decision to call it a failure may be delayed for months.
Again, the remedy—which does not necessarily involve much time and expense—is to reduce the stigma of failure. This requires the discipline—better yet, the enthusiasm—to use sophisticated analysis to ensure that the right lessons are learned and the right remedies are employed.
Why is failure analysis often shortchanged? Because examining our failures in depth is emotionally unpleasant and can chip away at our self-esteem. Left to our own devices, most of us will speed through or avoid failure analysis altogether. On Monday, Chris left them alone.
On Wednesday, the group met to talk about what had gone wrong. As a result, by Thurday, they were ready to have a much more constructive discussion with a larger group about how to do things differently next time around. The school celebrated its 50 th anniversary last year and Wendy and her team were responsible for a series of commemorative events. Wendy and her team were crushed.
No one wanted to. As the head of the office, she even considered resigning. But soon she saw that her mood was affecting her team, and she made a conscious effort to change it. She decided to set up two meetings every week. Start by redefining what failure means to you. If you define failure as the discrepancy between what you hope to achieve such as getting a job offer and what you might achieve learning from the experience , you can focus on what you learned, which helps you recalibrate for future challenges.
This is a list of what may not happen as a result of your fear — the cost of inaction. And finally, focus on learning. It was the first time he had interviewed for the C-level, and when we met, he was visibly agitated. As I listened to him describe the situation, it became clear that the failure was related to his company and outside industry factors, rather than to any misstep on his part.
Despite that fact, Alex could not shake the perception that he himself had not succeeded, even though there was nothing he could have logically done to anticipate or change this outcome. People are quick to blame themselves for failure, and companies hedge against it even if they pay lip service to the noble concept of trial and error. What can you do if you, like Alex, want to face your fear of screwing up and push beyond it to success?
Here are four steps you can take:. Redefine failure.
0コメント