James Dyson and Failure

I've posted regarding failure and problem-solving before. I came across this by James Dyson on Wired.com, arguably one of the more famous inventors of our time and his thoughts on failure.

Too often we're afraid to fail. Whether because of embarrassment, cost, or safety issues. However, it is one of the best ways to learn. Very few of us can manage to solve problems entirely in theory and place them into practice flawlessly.

More about Failure

We like to celebrate our successes. We have graduation parties, celebrate the completion of projects, a big sale, etc. It's easy.

How do you deal with your failures? Do you try to forget about them, sweeping them under the rug? Maybe you're embarrassed about the failure or have been punished for the failure.

I think it's important (perhaps after some time has passed) to review your failures to see what might have gone wrong. Is there something specific you can avoid in the future? Is there a pattern emerging where similar situations end up the same? Recognizing patterns is what we as humans are good at, but we need to be looking for them. Burying your head in the sand and hoping to forget about a bad experience increase the chances that you'll end up in a similar situation again.

Also, leaders shouldn't punish people for failures (other than perhaps ethical failures - and certainly criminal failures). It will make them afraid to take risks, try something new, or be creative. How can you expect creative solutions to difficult problems if the consequences of failure are too great.

Mistakes can be golden if you learn from them.

Fail=Success

Sorry for re-posting but not only does this post have good advice but I've recently come across the Lifehacker website. If you use computers (and what scientist or engineer doesn't), Lifehacker has many great tips, links to make your computing life easier. They are scouring the web so you don't have to.

Occam's Razor

I just finished, "The Monster of Florence ". Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi's account of a serial killer in Florence, Italy and the investigations attempting to find the killer(s).

I was struck by the complexity of the theories that the investigators proposed in order to build their case against some individuals (and groups). This brought to mind Occam's Razor's, a principle that states that you should make as few assumptions as possible when trying to explain a phenomenon.

This applies to finding solutions. The more complex the solution, you develop, the more chances there are for problems in the future. Keeps things simple and your solutions will have greater longevity, be easier to implement, and easier for others to follow. Complex solutions can be a house of cards that will come crashing down when one aspect or another isn't fully implemented as intended.

Dueling Kaizens

My last post about types of solutions brought to mind an experience we had with Kaizen events.

The first Kaizen event tackled a quality issue with one of our analyses and implemented a rather complex solution, which while providing more accurate results, led to a much more complicated maintenance. The second Kaizen event focused on the maintenance complexity and ended up undoing the work of the first team to make the maintenance quicker and simpler. Two Kaizen events ended up with a net zero change in the analysis. Needless to say, this was discouraging as well as a waste of money.

How did this happen? The Kaizen teams were made up mostly of those outside the group and one technician from the lab. Neither team had any members in common. The teams also did not have anybody who understood the overall problem and therefore focused on the one aspect they were challenged with. They were successful at the details but not in the overall problem.

Ultimately the lab chemists and technicians looked at the problem together and realized that the issue was not with the analysis itself, but with the environment the analysis was being done in. Improving the conditions under which the analysis was being performed, ended up solving both issues.

The advantage of bringing those unfamiliar with the process into a problem solving situation is that they have a beginner's mind. The disadvantage is that they don't have a full understanding of the situation. Although their input is valuable, they can't be allowed to dominate the process over those more familiar with the problem.

Failure

In Chapter 14 of his book Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, Jared Diamond lists general reasons for failure of societies and their ultimate demise. These apply also to working with technical problems. If you don't succeed at problem solving you will ultimately be out of business. I'll just list them now as food for thought and ruminate on each of them later on.

• Failure to anticipate
• Failure to perceive a present problem.
• Failure to try to solve a problem
• Failure to succeed at attempts to solve the problem
  

My website is primarily directed at providing assistance in solving known problems, but taking a look at the big picture of why you get into problems in the first place is beneficial. Ideally, one anticipates problems before they happen and work out solutions proactively. That is the reasoning behind FMEA (Failure Mode & Effects Analysis). Even though you may not have had prior experience of failure of your process or system, or failure may have occurred in the past, FMEA is a tool for detecting weaknesses and developing safeguards.