DocAndersen
First off, most organizations support the concept of commitment around failure. No one likes it when we fail, and in many cases, we have an organizational desire to move quickly past failure. I think in many cases, there is a great organizational benefit to remembering, recalling, and learning from failure. I’ve had CIO’s and CEO’s tell me I was crazy for saying that but I believe it is true. If you have an organizational failure learning system, then what happens when you fail? You don’t condemn it you learn from it.
Many organizations in the real world also adopt the stop at failure commitment model — very few organizations power through initial failures as de rigor. In the real world, the first two are the models most companies adopt. Failure is a really bad thing.
When you consider the reality of failure in organizations and the commitment that often accompanies that (to and around) it changes the impact on innovation. Just to note, any organization willing to take a risk is supporting innovation, even if they stop at the first failure. This isn’t about stifling innovation.
A commitment to failure forces creative project realignment. If you fail (and we all do at some point), then you have to figure out if your idea has merit and redesign the solution to fit into another project or idea. It’s like a rider attached to a Bill in the US Congress. (Although sometimes the riders attached to the Bill end up being larger than the Bill itself). In this instance, with failure as a wall rather than a fluid part of the project, you end up with a squishier definition of failure. The definition of failure almost becomes a full stop problem. There are few full stop problems that even time can’t solve.
The commitment around failure means you have to consider the risk of failure in your project and have a workaround quickly available. Sometimes this can cause your project to veer off course a little. Clayton Christensen[1] published the innovator’s dilemma several years ago. In that book, he talked about the chosen path of innovation and the actual path being slightly different. He was addressing the concept of commitment around failure, although I doubt that was his intent. It’s my interpretation of his information at this point.
Software Architects, innovation and inclusion
Software Architects are people who consider what is coming when they design what will be there. In those considerations, where does innovation play? Are software architects looking far enough forward to see what may be on the horizon?
Or even should they? Should software architects be looking at the very edge of what is possible? Sometimes past the edge of what we know, things stop being clear.
It’s a balancing act that many software architects struggle with. How far over the horizon should I peak in building my solution. I’ve asked myself and others that question for years. Based on my thinking over the past few months, I’ve put together some simple rules going forward for architects to consider.
[1] Harvard Press “The innovators dilemma” by Clayton Christensen
-
Question of
did you know the Altair computer uses switches and didn’t have a keyboard?
-
Yes
-
No
-
-
Question of
Have you ever used a computer punch card?
-
Yes
-
No
-
-
Question of
did you know OCR was once only done by using punch cards? (optical character recognition)
-
Yes
-
No
-
If Elon Musk gave up due to failure then we will not have PayPal, Elon Cars and such. On the other hand, the guy got money. That makes the difference ?
The reality of failure can be driven by the presence of money.
I capture the unique reality from your article. For a long time we have read, heard, and maybe even been trained about failure; how to respond to it, and efforts to rise from that failure. Unfortunately, it seems that not all people or organizations are ready or committed to it, at least preparing themselves for innovation failures. Indeed, failure or innovation that failed to involve and drop many things.
well said, much better than what I said. I do like the way you said it.
I’m just wondered by the reality you’re describing, Doc. You are closer to the technology innovators there, so you know them better, while we are generally just users, including some part of innovative thinking itself.
I always tell innovators to go find “smart just users” like you. The difference between success and failure, before you start is a use case that helps “just users” do their jobs!
Maybe they also haven’t made Use Case “Thought of Experts”.
that is an interesting question, made me laugh, but I don’t have an answer.
Some one told me in the airforce that the pioneer of computers was invented to drop bombs in sequence, such as the Lancaster bomber. To be a bombardier was a specialised job and failure on the way bombs were dropped meant the death of the whole crew of the plane.
so a system was devised on planes so that bombs were dropped like a card in a slot. It was indeed a type of birth for the invention of computers
actually, Charles Babbage invented the concept of the computational machine that would be the computer long before there were planes to drop bombs.
The size was modified greatly so that bomber could leverage on the fly calculations.
That is most interesting thanks
you are most welcome!
failure has value, if nothing else it can show you how to avoid similar mistakes in the future
You demonstrate that with your WIP process here on Virily. It can be very difficult, part of failure is sometimes we just have to say, we were wrong.
The inability to accept being wrong forces us to continue on the path we choose.
when you refuse to admit your mistake, and stubbornly continue down the wrong path, then you have truly failed…
That is when the blame game starts or the guilt game. It is very sad to watch if you aren’t involved. It is really sad when you are in the middle of it.
sad to watch, unless it happens to someone who needs to fail. then it is quite satisfying…
My opinion is that someone understands innovation, others do not and need more learning.
As always your view is welcomed and I agree!!!! I suspect we can take your brilliant thought and say “people know some areas of innovation, such as medical, computers, and so on. What they now they understand. what they don’t know they struggle with!”
This is all new to me Doc. Kuddos to you for sharing your tech knowledge.
Thanks – this is mostly because Alex pushed me to do this! But the goal is educate more people on the pain points of innovation, and the life of innovators.
This is for me science fiction, dear friend….the more I read the less I understood … this is too complicated for me
I am very sorry. I am trying to show the complexity of innovation, but I am afraid I’ve confused people.
You did not perfectly present this to me only I did not get up to such matters … I admit it
I love that you are honest. Thank you!!!!
That’s how it was … I did not go to school too much … it always smelled me … so I was just a driver
All of us give to the world. It is what makes things work!
This topic is incomprehensible to me Doc. I can not comment on anything specific about it. Hahaha
Thanks for reading anyway! Innovation is a critical thing for what I do.