Is Failing Fast a Good Thing?

We have all heard the phrase ‘fail fast’ when trying new things or implementing tests. On the surface, it makes sense. Test something for a short period of time, decide if it is working and either stop or scale up, depending on the results.

However.

When we look closer, we see that failing fast is not always as easy as it sounds.

Is there a risk of deciding too fast and missing factors that could change the decision if it was made later? Influencing a behavior change takes time and deciding too fast can be a mistake. Also, deciding too fast can miss a latent effect on response. For example, marketing campaigns typically take a quarter to show impact and sometimes take longer.

One campaign test we did that we reacted too quickly was to reduce advertising spend to a specific customer segment. Initially there was no change in buying behavior, from which we concluded that the investment reduction had no effect on sales, and we could re-invest that budget elsewhere. But, after three months, we started to see a decline in buying as a result of the investment reduction. So, the test decision after four months was the exact opposite of what it was after two months.

The concept of fail fast is admirable but must be couched with circumstances of the condition being tested. The timeline to determine a true fail fast outcome should be completed before the test is launched.

This is the final commentary on the marketing questions I have been pondering. My intent was to spark some debate, at least in your own thinking, even if you did not agree with everything I said.