Reaction to Failure is the Better Measuring Stick

by Toby Armour

The right decision in the aftermath of failure is a better measuring stick for an organization undergoing cultural change rather than what happens in the wake of success. The reaction to failure gives better insight into organizational character.  As both Thomas Wayne and Alfred Pennyworth ask Bruce Wayne “Why do we fall, Bruce?  So we can learn to pick ourselves up.”   This is true for both private sector and the public sector organizations, and illustrated in the  experience of the DoD, as it  works to meet the challenges of the future.  As the DoD moves to make fundamental cultural shifts in order to modernize and capture the ideas and technology required to meet the threat of America’s global strategic competitors, it is important to look at the organization’s reaction to failures.  

The human aspect of innovation is just as important as technological innovations.  In the DoD, innovation is mostly discussed as new technology. But innovation ultimately rests on people. Buying all the advanced machines in the world doesn’t guarantee that people will rethink old strategies and develop new ones. Discussions around the DoD’s innovation and modernization efforts often stray to technology solutions that will be necessary for the department to continue its competitiveness in the decades to come.  However, as Adam Grant, Organizational Psychologist and Professor at Penn’s Wharton School of Business, has argued during his testimony on the DoD’s management challenges before the Senate Committee on Armed Services, the human aspect of innovation in this process and the benefits of ground-breaking technology will not be meaningful if there isn’t parallel development in the culture to harness and use it in the best possible way.  

For the DoD to make a culture shift, it will need to take more risks, however, for the DoD to feel comfortable taking more risks,  its attitude towards failure needs to shift. The Silicon Valley belief that “failure is learning” has birthed some of the most innovative ideas and organizations in the last 50 years. 

An example of the benefits of both learning from failure and the recognition of the need for human innovation is the experience of the Army Future’s Command in its attempts to replace the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The original RFP outlined such a stringent prototyping process that the Army only had a single design to move forward with.  Instead of bulldozing ahead with that design, AFC realized it had to admit its mistake, and recalibrate the selection process to better allow for flexibility throughout the development process. Some have characterized the decisions in and around the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle RFP failure as “learning finally” instead of “learning quickly.”   It is, however, important to acknowledge that the Army did not choose to treat their requirements as a “one way street,” which would have resulted in the purchase and use of a vehicle that would have simply been “good enough.” Equipping the war fighter for conflict in the next era of warfare with mobility platforms that are “good enough” would be a problematic decision to say the least.     

AFC’s decision to restart and rethink the RFP process for the Bradley’s replacement is an example of the human aspect of innovation that the DoD needs. This bright spot came in the wake of a procedural failure, making it an even more important marker for the culture shift that is so necessary for continued effectiveness.  

This choice in the aftermath of failure should remind organizations that the number or frequency of success is not always the best way to measure cultural change.  To see if a team is changing its core set of beliefs and doctrines, look at the way it comports itself after something goes wrong.  Does it put its head down and bull forward towards what could be an even greater failure? Or does it reassess and adapt.  If you want to measure the frequency of high fives, take note after a win.  If you want to see evidence of lasting cultural change, watch closely after something has gone wrong.