Asked about his repeated failure to devise an electric light, Thomas Edison supposedly said something like this: "I have not failed 10,000 times. I have not failed once. I have succeeded in proving that those 10,000 ways will not work." There are disputes about the exact phrasing he used, but the gist of his message is clear: there is some value in failure.
Although his claim is valid, Edison certainly didn't set out to find those 10,000 ways that don't work. That's why his comment is somewhat humorous.
It's an example of reframing — the process of altering how we view concepts, situations, conditions, or events, usually by changing how we view the importance of contextual elements. In the example above, Edison emphasizes the often-ignored value of knowing which candidate solutions don't work.
Although reframing is helpful when we fail, succeeding is even better. Here are three tips for avoiding the need to reframe failure.
- Design the approach to yield value independent of outcome
- Although all efforts have (or should have) primary objectives, we can sometimes design our efforts so that failure to achieve the primary objective inherently contributes to a different success. For example, if Approach A fails, but Approach B can use much of the knowledge or infrastructure generated by having attempted A, then the failure of A leaves us in good position for B.
- Intentionally interlocking solution approaches in this manner might require attempting a less-favored approach first, but the risk management benefits of inverted order can be attractive enough to make inversion sensible.
- Define multiple objectives
- Defining multiple objectives from the outset creates multiple opportunities for success, even if some objectives are more important than others. For example, in a proposal effort, winning the contract is the obvious primary objective. But making the cut to the final short list might also be an achievement, if we're employing process improvements and simultaneously studying their effects on proposal efforts.
- Having multiple Although reframing is
helpful when we fail,
succeeding is
even betterobjectives generates value even if the primary objective isn't realized. Articulating them in advance makes reframing an undesirable primary outcome less necessary, because success in achieving the secondary objectives is so evident. - Shorten the goal horizon
- Primary objectives that are achievable only after large-scale investments of resources and time tend to be less certain, because predicting outcomes of complex activities over long time scales is difficult. And with elevated levels of uncertainty come decreased probabilities of success.
- By setting objectives that are achievable on shorter time scales, adjustments for unforeseen events, based on what we learn along the way, become more achievable. The learning then becomes part of the outcome, which is a success in itself. And we can apply that learning to the next set of shorter-range objectives.
All three of these tactics make available options that teams might not otherwise notice. What options have so far escaped your notice? Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Project Management:
- Scheduling as Risk Management
- When we schedule a complex project, we balance logical order, resource constraints, and even politics.
Here are some techniques for using scheduling to manage risk and reduce costs.
- Scope Creep, Hot Hands, and the Illusion of Control
- Despite our awareness of scope creep's dangerous effects on projects and other efforts, we seem unable
to prevent it. Two cognitive biases — the "hot hand fallacy" and "the illusion
of control" — might provide explanations.
- Scope Creep and Confirmation Bias
- As we've seen, some cognitive biases can contribute to the incidence of scope creep in projects and
other efforts. Confirmation bias, which causes us to prefer evidence that bolsters our preconceptions,
is one of these.
- Team Risks
- Working in teams is necessary in most modern collaborations, but teamwork does carry risks. Here are
some risks worth mitigating.
- Premortems
- Premortems are simulated retrospective examinations of future events, conducted as if those future events
had already occurred. By combining the benefits of psychological safety with a shift in temporal perspective,
they offer advantages for planners.
See also Project Management and Project Management for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming January 22: Storming: Obstacle or Pathway?
- The Storming stage of Tuckman's model of small group development is widely misunderstood. Fighting the storms, denying they exist, or bypassing them doesn't work. Letting them blow themselves out in a somewhat-controlled manner is the path to Norming and Performing. Available here and by RSS on January 22.
- And on January 29: A Framework for Safe Storming
- The Storming stage of Tuckman's development sequence for small groups is when the group explores its frustrations and degrees of disagreement about both structure and task. Only by understanding these misalignments is reaching alignment possible. Here is a framework for this exploration. Available here and by RSS on January 29.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed