RESEARCH METHODS
METHOD
Secondary research
Desk research is conducted to review the work of experts on the topic of failure to.
Primary research
Interviews are conducted with small businesses and startups.
Expert interviews
I engage with several experts within the organizational learning field.
Synthesis
The data from many conversations are transcribed, key points identified, and information synthesized to uncover key insights which are related back to theory for critical review.
Case study probe
Identify a group of 6 IKEA employees that agree to participate as my case study. I devise a series of questions to uncover attitude towards failure and feedback.
Ideation
An unmet need identified is for a system to preserve the IKEA legacy, including the practice of sharing learning that used to be facilitated by a generation of old timers that have either retired or died. I look at possible systems to simplify access to lessons from error based learning.
Evaluation
Feedback on the proposed solution is elicited from case study participants to improve the concept.
PURPOSE
Understand how failure is defined and categorized. Explore individual and institutional barriers to learning from failure within an organizational setting.
Explore different varieties of failure.
Discover if the fail-fast mentality is put in practice, or if it is simply a slogan. If real, uncover strategies which might promote this.
I hope to learn what their work consists of, which techniques they use, and what are the common challenges they face when trying to help an organization change.
To uncover methods used by small startups which might be adapted to help my case study, as well as other structured organizations that maintain an aversion to failure.
Uncover attitudes and practices related to error, learning, trust, feedback and reflection Loof for unmet needs or pain points. Look to identify if strategies utilized by new business can be applied.
I select an idea that works just as well in analog as digital. Ultimately, it would live in both worlds, but having a physical card deck that can be included as part of the welcome package for new employees, pulled out on company retreats, or (if they dare) sold in their museum gift shop.
Based on evaluation by case study participants, , a list of enhancements is prepared to inform the next iteration.
OUTCOME
Gain familiarity with experts in the field including Cannon and Edmondson, Petroski, Sitkin and others. I recognize that the value of failure, and the focus of this research is not on failure itself, but on strategies to learn from it.
Entrepreneurs prove to be an interesting group to explore, as there does appear that their acceptance of risk leads them to have a different relationship with failure, than for instance, an employee.
There seems to be a growing recognition of the need to become a learning organization. Companies that hire consultants are aware that they do not learn from mistakes, but are uncertain how to change? Challenges identified are trust, feedback and knowledge transfer.
These first insights provide a road map which informs the questions I provide to my case study. Having identified areas where startups engage well with failure, let's see if any overlap with IKEA’s needs.
It turns out that IKEA already employs numerous mechanisms to facilitate reflection and feedback. However, I uncover that a great deal of company knowledge is tacit, and easily lost as the company grows/ages.
The purpose of the intervention is to preserve knowledge in a highly accessible, fun and friendly way. It cannot simply be a lifeless database that would be seldom looked at. Descriptions are kept super short, limited to what fits on a card, but can link to full version online. Maybe find the old guys that are still alive and capture the stories they can recall.
Suggestions are reviewed for implementation into version 2.0.
METHODS OF ENGAGEMENT
The goal of this project is to promote a fail-friendly culture in support of experiential learning. I start off with the hypothesis that since failure is a regular outcome of risky bets, then tolerance for risk relates to tolerance of failure. Based on this premise, it seems that businesses that assume higher risk might be a good place to explore failure friendly practices. To test this, I call on small businesses, who open themselves up to far higher risk relative to the vast majority of people who prefer the safety of employment within a company, and never strike out on their own. Ultimately, while the small business community provides useful insight into flexible and improvised practices that are developed as needed, businesses with just a handful of employees provide less input on team dynamics impacts. Taking it up a level in terms of aspiration to scale, I turn to startups, the community which popularized the Fail Fast mantra as a testament to the riskiness of their experimental nature (DiPiro and Chisholm-Burns, 2013). Reis (2011) the intent of this slogan, pointing out that failure is not actually the goal, but rather, to get failing out of the way. Furthermore, he underscores that startups are not simply smaller versions of larger companies, that they in fact have a different mission. While established companies are profit-focused, a startup’s life or death mission is to gain traction, industry-speak for proving viability of new and often untested concepts. Another notable difference being the focus on speed, emphasizing the fast element of failing fast. This key component is how small but stealth startups are able to outmaneuver dominant players who hold better position and deeper resources. McGrath (2011) highlights how the need to move quickly leads to brutal efficiency, in order to not let weak ideas siphon off limited resources, which could be redirected to better prospects. Sitkin (2000) notes a characteristic unique to startups is that while failure is likely to impede career advancement within many professions, within the startup world 'you are not taken seriously until you’ve had a couple of failures'.
To locate startups. I attend the Malmo Startup Dojo, a monthly meet-up of entrepreneurs whose large ambitions include rapid scaling. The club’s purpose is to provide necessary feedback for new concepts, and while I did not yet have a design for my solution, I took the podium to discuss the role of failure as a learning opportunity within growing businesses.
Ultimately, what I hoped to uncover were practices employed by fail-friendly businesses, to see how these might be transferred to larger more structured companies. To gain insight into learning processes within developed companies, I look to Spotify and IKEA.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Field research is conducted with the highest respect of participants’ limits. I begin by explaining the nature of the research to ensure that participants understand what is required of them. They are asked to share only as much as they feel comfortable, and that they can stop the interview at any time, should they experience a change of heart. All participants were required to provide written consent. They were informed that conversations would be transcribed and those who requested are anonymous. While all small businesses initially said I could refer to them by name, some later decided they would prefer to be excluded, so some of the names I provide are fictitious. I tried to be mindful of Swedish culture, which is fairly private, where there is less tendency towards open critique of one's workplace. Participants were made aware that input would be included in the project I submit, and could be published or be included within research or workshops I produce later. My project is available to all participants upon request. Taking these protective steps, I’m confident that no information included here can compromise the participants. My only regret is that due to safety considerations during a pandemic, a more participatory and collaborative process that I had originally envisioned was not possible.