result, success can even be harder to cope with than failure. Any coach will tell you that staying on top is far harder than getting there in the first place. This is true not just of teams but of groups in general. Once an organization succeeds, the nearly irresistible urge is to play it safe, protect a lead, keep doing things the same way. There is no better prescription for failure, as so many once-successful companies have discovered: Railway Express, Western Union, Kodak.
P: We are a society hardwired to succeed and scared to fail. Why shouldn’ t we be afraid of failure? K: Only those who aren’ t afraid to fail can take the risks that lead to genuine success. Management guru Warren Bennis says that the best managers not only are not afraid to fail, they look for opportunities to do things that might not work out. One told him that if he had any knack for leadership at all, it was in making as many mistakes as possible [ and ] as quickly as possible to learn what not to do.
P: Can you give three good examples of businesses or companies that have succeeded after spectacularly failing? K: Coca-Cola, as [ previously ] mentioned. Ford, more than once( after the Edsel crashed and burned; after it lost nearly US $ 13 billion in 2006; etc.). Apple, following its many product failures, the Newton especially. Often, the best way to find out what does work is to first find out what doesn’ t. That’ s why IBM’ s Tom Watson once said that the fastest way to succeed is to double your rate of failure.
P: Among all the leaders in the world, who do you think embraced failure the best? K: Thomas Edison was a virtual bard of failure. Edison said he’ d never failed; he had just found 10,000 ways that didn’ t work. Steve Jobs spent much of an entire commencement address recounting how his biggest setbacks had led to his greatest triumphs.
“ Performance reviews— if employed at all— should include recognition of innovative approaches being tried by employees, even if those approaches don’ t always produce immediate results.”
P: How can advocating a riskfriendly work place create an environment ideal for innovation? K: Not just advocating but creating a risk-friendly working environment— one in which it’ s assumed that risks employees take may not succeed— releases the creative energy of those who feel that they won’ t necessarily be penalized if they take a chance and fail. 3M’ s vaunted atmosphere of innovation was based on its willingness to put up with mistakes made by product developers. In the Silicon Valley, it’ s taken for granted that risk-taking will result in failure at least as often as success. That’ s why entrepreneurs out there consider failure evidence that you are [ not ] playing it safe. They say that if you haven’ t failed, you’ re not trying hard enough. The Silicon Valley could be the most risk-friendly— which is to say failure-tolerant— working environment in the history of American business.
P: You said:“‘ Success’ and‘ failure’ are merely labels we hang on complex events trying to simplify them.” If that’ s the case, how then should we measure success? K: Good question. I think success is best measured long-term, in terms of lasting viability and profitability when it comes to business. Placing too much emphasis on meager short-term achievements can make it harder, not easier, to enjoy bigger gains in the long-term.
November 2012 n PULSE 21