Failing smart
"Failures must bring you closer to your vision"
It is a mantra I have often used. And very much how I approach agile innovation (e.g. see Search and Vision for Systematic Innovation)
However...
It is only partially true, as failure may happen simply because you are disorganised, with no relations to your vision. Fixing organisation issues helps avoid drifting further away from your vision, it does not bring you closer to your vision! Still, unmanaged organisational issues will eventually consume you 'from within', therefore they too must be addressed.
Can we focus on fixing organisation issues? Can we identify a subset of failures as 'organisational failures', and others as 'non-organisational failures on the way to our vision'? The simple answer is yes! Yet we most know what we are looking for.
Six types of failures
When I act as agile manager I try to distinguish between six types of failures. These are:
- Fail Goal: Fail to achieve previously promised goals
- Waiting: Fail deadline because of waiting on others
- Underutilisation: Fail to use all your team members
- Exhaustion: Fail to stay productive because of exhaustion
- Inconsistency: Fail because of misalignments
- Queuing: Fail because of past work no longer relevant, or past work never finished.
Six ways to improve your organisation
# | Failure type | Observation | Corrective action |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Fail Goal | Fail to achieve previously promised goals | Review / pivot how resources approach goals |
2 | Waiting | Fail deadline because of waiting on others | Review how resources approach work |
3 | Under-utilisation | Fail to use all your team members | Review how goals are broken down into work |
4 | Exhaustion | Fail to stay productive because of exhaustion | Review how goals are picked up by resources |
5 | Inconsistency | Fail because of misalignments | Review how work is shared across resources |
6 | Queuing | Fail because of past work no longer relevant, or past work never finished. | Review how common work impacts different goals |
You may note the common patterns both in the observations and in the corrective measures above. This is because they all refer to the same system! This is important, and maybe the most important learning from this post. When managing fast greenfield innovation projects:Comparing failure types is as important as to address specific failures!
This is because when a failure type happen more often than others, we can take organisational actions even before we understand the specific details of each failure!
A final note: the approach is scalable.
All original content copyright James Litsios, 2022.
Comparing failure types is as important as to address specific failures!
No comments:
Post a Comment