LESSONS AND REWARDS OF FAILURE

Lessons and Rewards of Failure

Table of Contents

Introduction2

Discussion and Analysis3

Probe and learn process (Lynn et al, 1996).4

Reading Behavior of Learning By Failure9

Conclusion13

References15

Bibliography17

Appendix20

Lessons and Rewards of Failure

Introduction

According to Lovallo and Kahneman (2003), the performance-cons are common in the business: 70% of new manufacturing plants in North America close their doors during their first decade of operation, about three quarters of mergers and acquisitions do not result in a more advantageous position, the large most new products are discontinued after a few years, and so on. However, despite the high incidence of failures in the organizational world is Note that most work in management has a bias in favor of success. Such observation fully justifies our interest in this article, chess. In particular, product launches failed retain our attention, since they are theoretically the most conducive to learning. Indeed, some studies. Considering innovation as a “game several times,” these results in successive projects, technically interdependent. In this perspective, the failure of an innovation should allow to draw lessons for the following products. For this reason, history is replete with examples of commercial disappointments that led, eventually, to much a greater success (IBM, Apple, Motorola, etc.). The failure is therefore not a abomination is, however, synonymous with experience. However, even if this idea is widespread among the public, Cannon and Edmondson (2005) note that there very few companies who learn systematically from their failures. This article aims precisely to provide an update on this issue, trying to find out if a setback is act as a “stimulus” and trigger a process of organizational learning.

Discussion and Analysis

To do this, first we start work on the innovation process - very briefly - the issue of learning from business failure. We come to the conclusion that this literature lack of a theoretical framework to anchor its proposals. We propose, for Therefore, to include the issue of market failures in the learning models behaviorist school (see JG March and collaborators). This allows us to show that the dynamic learning failure is often defective, since it is faced with many obstacles. Moreover, assuming that the organization takes - still - some lessons of failure, such “performance learning” does not guarantee much better “organizational performance”.

Ultimately, in this paper, the issue of “performance” is considered in two ways very different:

- As a stimulus (potential) learning, if one is willing to consider - accordance with behavioral perspective

- That failure is a level of performance below initial expectations.

- As a result of the learning process by asking ourselves two separate issues:

- Is the organization able to learn from a failure to which it is faces (of interest, in this case, performance learning)?

- What is the impact of what has been learned about the organization's performance?

Market failures seem inevitable in innovation. Moreover, to completely new products, the failure may be the only way really effective to get an idea of market behavior. Indeed, as no one knows whether a product is truly innovative something until it has ...