Skip to main content

Learning to fail


We were taught at a young age that failure is bad. We were told to avoid failure at all cost. Follow the rules, don’t deviate from the script and successful will come. The American education system reinforces this idea and emphasizes these values in the classroom. But we live in a world where gradual change can kill you. To survive, we need to reinvent constantly ourselves. We need to learn to fail, which is hard to do when it goes against everything that we’ve been told.
If we trace this back to the beginning, it’s clear that the American education system has ingrained a fear of failure in all who passed through the doors of schools. I’m not referring to the curriculum or learning critical skills such as writing, oral communication or math, this isn’t the problem. The problem is that teachers and students are penalized for taking risks. Teachers have little room for experimentation because there is a vast amount of curriculum to cover, from which they cannot deviate. And so they do as they are told, building their lesson plans based on what is mandated. Similarly, students are encouraged to take the safer path. The premise is that “easier” classes lead to better grades, which means getting access to better schools, which can lead to a better job and better future.
But this is far from the truth of reality. Today, every industry is being disrupted. We live in an economy of ideas, a place where a majority of tasks and jobs are being automated. The safer thing to do is to create a new job. The challenge is that to create new opportunities, we need to deviate from social norms. We need to try something new and different, something that people might not necessarily agree with us.
If you look at any startup, you’ll notice that they tend to pivot many times before finding the right market fit. The reality is that most products and companies will fail. According to Steve Blank, no business plan survives its first contact with the brand. In other words, businesses should test and validate their hypotheses before building.
But this approach of trial and error challenges our cultural norms. No one wants to be associated with failure, and people tend to be remembered by their project, whether it was a failure or a success. And no one wants to put failure on his or her resume. We want to fit cultural norms, we want to be a part of the broader social group, and we want to meet society’s standard of success. This is because, as Peter Thiel said, courage is in far shorter supply than genius. This idea of being courageous and embracing failure is evident in the character traits of the most successful entrepreneurs who, more often than not, are disagreeable and challenging. They don’t require approval from our society to move ahead with their disruptive ideas. They learn to fail.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Irrational Power of Nudge Brands

Nudge brands are brands built on interactions, not attitudes. They are mostly defined by experiences, not TV campaigns. They are designed around people's inconsistencies and errors, not for machines. They are simple, not complex. They like to break things into small chunks that are less daunting than big tasks. They focus on changing behavior, not generating awareness and interest. The Paris metro system card is a nudge brand. It is designed against human errors. You can use the card in any direction. IKEA is a nudge brand. It uses the power of personal investment. The more involved people are in creating something, the better they feel about the end product. Ryanair is a nudge brand. It chunks the whole purchase process. They lock you in with a low 'seat price' first to get a mental commitment. Then, they start to add the extra charges in bite-sized 'chunks.' Hare Krishna is a nudge brand. It is built on the reciprocity rule by giving away daisies. People should …

The Curse of Advertising Resources

With more platforms, more products and more content who are trying to reach a disengaged audience, it is becoming harder and harder for brands to stand out. Conventional practices are no longer working. People don't watch TV as much as they used to, so they don't see commercials.  They don't click on banner ads. They don't pay attention to billboards ads. And they don't trust brands' messages. Part of the problem is that we are too dependent on traditional ad resources, which limits the realm of our creativity. To thrive in this new environment, we, ironically, need the freedom of a tight brief: what can you do with no budget for mass media?  Or limited marketing communications dollars?  To make a comparison, traditional advertising is a lot like countries and economies that rely on oil. This reliance handicaps innovation. Countries with a vast amount of natural resources tend to have (1) less economic growth and (2) worse development rates than other countrie…

The Engineering of Digital Consent

Today, we build brands through social interactions. People opinions online shape our decisions on what brands should we buy or endorse. 90% of customers said that online reviews influence their buying decisions. Our challenge is that consumers don't pay attention and trust the message coming from brands. So, how do we affect the opinion of others in this environment? In marketing, we spend a lot of time and money creating advertising with the hope that it goes viral. However, most of the campaigns have little influence in today's consumers. Many campaigns have even the oppositive effect, with consumers sharing negative opinions or blocking advertising altogether. Changing behavior is hard. I don't think we have a silver bullet to influence people online, but we can learn best practices from behavioral science to increase our chances. Getting a little better in predicting behavior can make a big difference. Here are four behavioral principles that we should consider when c…