Those of who teach and study learning, innovation, design thinking, and creativity are constantly talking about how important it is accept and learn from failure. Diego has written great stuff on this, arguing that "failure sucks but instructs" and when I give speeches, I often half-joke that, if you want to skip reading most of my books, perhaps the best compact summary are my various snippets and blog posts on failure, and perhaps the best diagnostic question for determining if an organization learns well, a boss creates a climate of fear or not, is innovative, turns knowledge into action, and on and on, is "What happens when people make a mistake? " Do they balmestorm and stigmatize? Forgive and forget? Or do they forgive and remember (see this post at HBR), so they can learn, help others learn, be held accountable and — if people keep making the same mistake — be reformed, transferred, or perhaps fired.
I just read the best piece on this perspective in a long time, a piece that the amazing Larry Prusak (who I would rather hear give a speech than any other management thinker, he can be magical) wrote for ASK Magazine called "What's Right About Being Wrong." Follow the link to read it all. Here are some quotes from this little gem that especially struck me:
It starts:
A number of years ago I was asked by some clients to come up with a rapid-fire indicator to determine whether a specific organization was really a "learning organization." Now, I have always believed that all organizations learn things in some ways, even if what they learn does not correspond well to reality or provide them with any useful new knowledge. After thinking about the request for a bit, though, I decided the best indicator would be to ask employees, "Can you make a mistake around here?"
Sounds familiar? Listen to the names he names in the next paragraph:
Why? Well, if you pay a substantial price for being wrong, you are rarely going to risk doing anything new and different because novel ideas and practices have a good chance of failing, at least at first. So you will stick with the tried and true, avoid mistakes, and learn very little. I think this condition is still endemic in most organizations, whatever they say about learning and encouraging innovative thinking. It is one of the strongest constraints I know of to innovation, as well as to learning anything at all from inevitable mistakes—one of the most powerful teachers there is. Some recent political memoirs by Tony Blair and George Bush also inadvertently communicate this same message by denying that any of their decisions were mistaken. If you think you have never made a mistake, there is no need to bother learning anything new.
The above paragraph really made me think. Indeed, just last night, I was having a drink with on my colleagues, and we were talking about the hallmarks of the good versus bad bosses we have had during our academic careers, and we realized that the good ones admit mistakes, tell everyone what they've learned, and push themselves and others forward in a new direction. The worst never admit they've made a mistake — so they are seen as arrogant, unable to learn, and unable to teach and lead effectively. (See this related post on medical mistakes).
To continue, then Larry started talking about Alan Greenspan as the rare example of someone who admitted a mistake:
I can easily summon up the grave image of Alan Greenspan testifying before Congress last year on the causes of the financial crisis. What was so very startling was seeing him admit that he was wrong! It was such an unusual event that it made headlines around the world. But why should it be so rare and so startling? Greenspan had a hugely complex job, one where many critical variables are either poorly understood or not known at all. Nevertheless, neither he, nor any other federal director I have heard about, has ever said anything vaguely like what he did that day before our elected officials and the public.
It is quite an essay, and as always, Larry brings a new spin. I have not exactly had warm feelings toward Greenspan since the meltdown, but Larry does a nice job of showing us how rare his confession is among powerful people.
Finally, note that I am not arguing that people should go around apologizing constantly for every little thing, as I show in Good Boss, Bad Boss, there is a kind or recipe her for apologizing in ways the build rather than undermine the confidence people have in your abilities — which includes, perhaps most crucially, demonstrating what you've learned and are doing differently as a result.
Leave a Reply