| Failing Forward: The Role of Constructive Responses to Failure in Organizational Effectiveness |
| | Edmondson, Amy C. | Harvard U. | aedmondson@hbs.edu | (617) 495-6732 |
| | Leonard, Dorothy | Harvard U. | dleonard@hbs.edu | (617) 495-6271 |
| | Cannon, Mark D. | Vanderbilt U. | mark.d.cannon@vanderbilt.edu | (615)-354-8768 |
| | Recent management literature frequently references organizational learning and knowledge management
as antidotes to stagnation. One aspect of learning that is generally more prevalent in exhortation than in
practice or proof of utility is constructive response to failure. This paper explores the importance of how
failure is conceptualized and treated by managers and discusses the relationship of this to performance.
It introduces the concept of "failing forward" -- the ability to fail intelligently and respond constructively
to intelligent failure so that the potential learning is captured.
Failing forward requires a set of proactive learning-oriented behaviors (including feedback-seeking to
identify failure, creative abrasion, experimentation, and analyzing failure). However, potent psychological
and structural barriers may impede these behaviors, even in organizations whose cultures are oriented
toward learning. Thus, the enactment of failing forward may require not only a favorable culture, but also
effective managerial behavior such as coaching and direction setting, as well as a supportive work context.
Consequently, although corporate culture is likely to influence employee responses to failure, we argue
that the true guardians of an organization's ability to fail forward are work group leaders or supervisors.
We propose a theoretical model of antecedents and consequences of failing forward, and present
empirical evidence from a recent field study to support the model.
|
| | Keywords: organizational learning; learning from failure; work groups |
| A Multilevel Model of Collective Failure |
| | Hofmann, David A. | Texas A&M U. | dhofmann@tamu.edu | (409) 845-3133 |
| | Morgeson, Frederick P. | Texas A&M U. | fmorgeson@cgsb.tamu.edu | (409) 845-4045 |
| | When engaged in goal directed behavior, it is perhaps self-evident that human and social systems will
occasionally produce actions or outcomes that are inefficient, unplanned, unintended, or unsuccessful.
In short, these systems will fail. Not all failures, however, should be viewed in a negative light. In fact,
many organizational theories and processes depend upon failure, or negative feedback, to ensure effective
performance (e.g., cybernetic control theories, organizational learning). When discussing failures within
organizations, however, little has been offered with respect to how these failures come about as well as
how small failures can be linked together to result in major system level failures. The purpose of the
current paper is to develop an information-processing multilevel model of collective failure. To accomplish
this, we: (1) define collectives; (2) discuss the importance of information processing; (3) describe the
importance of events for the structure of collective action and implications for information processing load;
(4) outline the implications of different information processing loads on the information processing activities
occurring within the collective, the types of failures that the collective will likely experience, and appropriate
responses with regard to either the prevention or management of these failures; and (5) consider the factors
that influence the proliferation of failures between collectives within organizations. |
| | Keywords: Failure; Information Processing; Multilevel |
| Improvisational Jazz and America's Fifth Mission to the Moon |
| | Rerup, Claus | Stanford U. | crerup@leland.stanford.edu | 650-725-7394 |
| | The purpose of this essay is to shown that improvisation is a viable way of acting within an organizational context.
Today there are few theories or tools available that can help us to manage improvisational processes.
From a rational and typically goal oriented perspective improvisation may at first look simply as messy
extemporaneous action, with no clear cause and relationships. Therefore, fans of structured action working within
the field of organizations are likely to ask the following question: Is improvisation really relevant?
In answering this question, it is argued that improvisation takes two things: experience and creativity.
Central aspects of improvisation are introduced by using an analogy involving jazz.
The analogy underline how employees improvise by balancing the tension between: a) exploitation of their current
experiences and, b) exploration of creative ways in which to use their stock of knowledge.
America's fifth mission to the moon is summarized to ground the argument. |
| | Keywords: improvisation; creativity; ambiguity |
| The Aesthetics of Management Storytelling: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly |
| | Taylor, Steven S. | Boston College | taylorsj@bc.edu | 510 849 9375 |
| | Fisher, Dalmar | Boston College | Fisher@bc.edu | 617-552-0453 |
| | An Aesthetics perspective on storytelling contributes to an understanding of how and why some stories are more effective than other stories. Three ideas about the nature of aesthetic experience, that is 1) felt meaning from abductive reasoning, 2) characterized by feelings of connectedness, and 3) enjoyed for its own sake, supply criteria for distinguishing between the good, the bad, and the ugly in organizational stories and suggest how to make stories more effective. This idea of good and bad stories informs every aspect of management storytelling, which we illustrate by reviewing the functions of management storytelling using Mintzberg's taxonomy of the roles of the manager. |
| | Keywords: Storytelling; Aesthetics; Management |