Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well, by Amy Edmonson, Part One

One of my favorite pieces of advice I share with my students is to “mine the lessons of failure.” Failures conveys lessons and insights in a way few other experiences do. And yet many of us struggle to stare at our failures plainly, unflinchingly, pushing through the embarrassment and angst of what happened to figure out why it happened. If the goal is important to us or was highly visible to others then our emotions and ego are likely an entangled mess, often wrapped up in a bow of shame. Failure is hard y’all. Thankfully, Professor Amy Edmondson ’s latest book, “Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well,” helps us unwrap that shameful bow. Edmonson not only guides us into a new way of thinking about failure, she equips us with much needed tools for our mining journey.

Key Points

A few months ago, I called out Edmonson’s brilliant distinction between the types of failure and the contexts of failure. In short, not all failure is equal and the environment matters. While business leaders often laugh at how academics can obsess over seemingly tiny details, in this case the details make a big difference.

Point #1: Not all failure is equal

?Too often, we lump failure into one giant, homogenous heap and expect people to intelligently dissect all failures equally well. The reality is not all failure is equal; thus, understanding what deviated from our expectations will require more effort in some cases. Edmonson encourages us to look at failure from the following three perspectives:

·????? Intelligent Failure is where we all want to live. These failures are often described as ‘good failure’ and essential partners to advancement and learning.

·????? Basic Failure is an “oops!” caused by a simple misstep; these are clear cut and most preventable.

·????? Complex Failure often involves multiple factors snowballing together to produce unexpected outcomes. While Complex Failure can vary size, they often occur in known settings and include at least one outside, wild factor.

?In other words, while basic failures irritate us, complex failures shake our core and can sow seeds of self-doubt and mistrust.

Point #2: Context matters

Next, we need to look at the context of failure. Think of this as environment in which the failure took place. If your environment is predictable, Edmonson calls this a Consistent Context. Places or events that have a clear or set routine, such as working as restaurant server, provide a Consistent Context. But what if your boss is asking you to lead a project in a completely new space? These are Novel Contexts and carry higher levels of uncertainty and risk; the newness of these scenarios ironically facilitates a higher willingness to tolerate failure.

Yet Variable Contexts may be the most frustrating as our established wells of knowledge prove vulnerable or incompatible with the situation. With so much emphasis placed on acquiring knowledge and practicing its implementation, you would think you can be prepared for every situation. Nope. The Variable Context is a paradox of circumstances primed to test our limits and pave the way for the next point.

Point #3: We have an emotional aversion to failure

Business professionals’ pride themselves on rational decision-making – goodness knows I do! So when the inevitable failure occurs we can be tempted to shift the blame to outside forces or other people. I’m not talking about clear-eyed, root cause analysis, but the instinctive reaction to protect our ego from what Professor Brené Brown calls the “warm wash of shame.” No one likes to look (or feel) stupid, least of all senior leaders or highly educated professionals. I spent years ‘shoulding’ all over myself as in, “I should have seen that coming!” Sometimes this is a fair statement. However, too often, this only deepens the shame we feel and actually intensifies our feelings around the original failure. No wonder most of us hold an emotional aversion to failure.

Three Key Takeaways for Leaders

So what’s a leader to do? Here are three practical takeaways you can experiment with this week:

Examine your communication style

An old mentor of mine used to say to me “I’m not really interesting, but I am SO interested!” He had a great knack for getting others to open up and share their thoughts, especially when everything seemed to be going wrong. Looking back and through the lens of Edmondson’s research, I now see he was great at building psychological safety and inviting people into conversation. When leaders face novel or variable contexts, the need for collaboration rises. This means we need to resist the urge to ‘tell’ and make it safe for others to add their thoughts.

When the context is consistent and collaboration is either less urgent or could pose a risk, then our communication style can shift to ‘tell’ or ‘sell.’ Think of busy emergency rooms with young doctors and nurses who are still mastering their craft; a directed communication strategy with clear guidelines and established protocols protects everyone. Similarly, new graduates starting at a company are bursting with the opportunity to employ their knowledge and often need to be ‘sold’ on the vision behind the ask of a task. Savvy leaders assess the field before deciding how to communicate with their team.

Invest in the time to determine which type of failure occurred

One of the greatest challenges in modern business is making the time to slow down and actually think. Whether it’s Warren Buffett or Professor Cal Newport, these advocates insist deep work demands time and space. When failure happens leaders must balance their desire to find out what happened (accuracy) against quickly determining what happened (speed). Again, context will be critical here. The National Transportation Safety Board averages anywhere from 12 to 24 months for their investigations; given the level of complex failures and impact within the various industries, the length is understandable. Your organization probably expects an immediate turnaround, but will that serve you in the long run? Invite a few trusted colleagues for a cup of tea and deep conversation to help you decide. Lastly, remember to be on the lookout for our old friend, emotional aversion, as it often sneaks in and shapes the agenda. ?

Normalize talking about failure

Of all the takeaways, this is the most difficult. Yet if we are to build creative workplaces and life altering innovation, we need to embrace talking about failure. And oh, leaders we need to share our stories first. This requires what Professor Adam Grant describes as “confident humility.” Think of it as tapping into your secret store of courage to be vulnerable, so you share your best failure story. Once you model this behavior your team knows they can safely do the same.

You might be thinking “I was with you…until now.” I get it. The corporate world often espouses ‘embracing failure’ and yet prepares your severance package after your project hiccups. Would it shock you to find out that Dr. Astro Teller , Captain of Moonshots at X (aka Alphabet/Google) celebrates failure with high fives, hugs, bonuses, and promotions? One of the most creative organizations anywhere fosters a culture where it is safe to fail because they understand failure is the partner for innovation.

TL;DR

Point #1: Not all failure is equal; assess if your failure is basic, intelligent, or complex

Point #2: Context matters; also assess if your context is consistent, novel, or variable

Point #3: We have an emotional aversion to failure; acknowledge failure brings pain

Manager Takeaway #1: Examine your communication style; what do your people need?

Manager Takeaway #2: Invest the time to determine which type of failure occurred; don’t rush it

Manager Takeaway #3: Normalize talking about failure; don’t hide it

Thanks for reading Part One! Part Two will focus on what else we need to do if we want to “master the science of failing well.”

Happy experimenting!

Dr. Anna-Lisa Leefers is a Clinical Associate Professor at 美国德克萨斯大学阿灵顿分校 . She teaches organizational behavior and leadership. Her research interests include leadership development and mindset theory. Dr. Leefers is also an Executive Coach and Founder of The Accomplished Leader, LLC.

?

?

?