by ReginaDeiPirati on 2/8/23, 4:27 PM with 53 comments
Do you have any process, ritual, etc.. that you use at work to embrace and celebrate failures?
E.g. I've recently learned that for a period at AirBnB there was an award for the biggest failed project and feature.
How have these practices impacted your work?
Do you feel that failures at work are accepted by the leadership and are used to create value (personal growth and business level)?
Curious to hear your opinions and experiences.
by bradleyy on 2/8/23, 4:57 PM
1) We have a culture that accepts "failures happen". People screw up, sometimes badly.
2) Imperative to this is a culture of ownership. You hide failures, your job is at risk. You own it, go public, get help, and all is well. Well, not exactly well, since there was a failure, but you get the picture.
3) Blameless post-mortems (hate that term, nobody died)
4) We do have a tongue-in-cheek slack channel for those folks who have caused a "p0", i.e. most-severe-breakage
I'd not want to work somewhere that didn't have the above; it's just part of being a mature organization.by belval on 2/8/23, 5:21 PM
Now I find the expression almost repulsive. Failure is part of work, not punishing failure is ok, celebrating it by saying "we learned so much" is a serious company smell for me.
by bryanlarsen on 2/8/23, 5:10 PM
– Thomas John Watson Sr., IBM
by JonChesterfield on 2/8/23, 4:43 PM
I'm trying to imagine a world where failure is seen as a good thing - it implies risks were taken, and without risk there is unlikely to be progress. I suppose AirBnB is a bit of a poster child for move fast and get sued later so that sort of fits.
by version_five on 2/8/23, 5:21 PM
A culture of experimentation, which as a requirement leads to failures, does not need to celebrate failure. That's like cargo cult mentality, thinking that the failure itself is causally doing something good.
by linsomniac on 2/8/23, 5:38 PM
by mikece on 2/8/23, 4:55 PM
by rlawson on 2/8/23, 6:01 PM
by sublinear on 2/8/23, 5:38 PM
If a dev messes up an implementation detail, that's a bug. It could be a small bug, could be a big bug, or could be a forced bug caused by contradictory requirements. Usually if it's a big bug then it's also probably the requirements. So then now there's at least one more owner of that bug besides the dev. Then you dig in further and find that the requirements are bad due to other seeming organizational problems, etc. so there are even more owners of the bug...
Natural to ask at this point when is a bug a feature? What is failure anymore if you managed to redefine things and embrace that there was no organizational dysfunction after all and that the nature of the problem revealed some deeper truth about how to solve it?
These are not abstract questions. What I'm saying is that work is just as much a process of discovery as it is a process to get some expected result. When the expectations have to change that's not failure, so there's really no such thing as failure and nothing to really celebrate or blame anyone about. If you're working then there's progress and that's all that really matters.
If people can't keep up with expectations it's completely arbitrary to decide to either adjust expectations or fire people. That's a matter of running the business, not a judgment one way or the other of the work that was done. This is the reason they say to not take it personally. It's not just a bunch of bull to make you feel better. It's simply irrelevant.
by jdbiggs on 2/8/23, 5:45 PM
by pm90 on 2/8/23, 4:57 PM
Anyway, the way I've seen it be embraced:
* healthy incident management culture with postmortems
* teams giving internal talks/writing blogs on biggest goof ups
* coworkers buying you shit if they break something. Mind: this wasn't required, just something people did it because they felt bad. I've received many beers/whiskeys this way
by logicalmonster on 2/9/23, 2:23 PM
When something goes wrong in aviation, they don't seem to rush to blame the pilot or an individual engineer who coded or welded something badly.
They look at the overall process and view it as a process failure.
They look at the flight checklist requirements and see if there are are any ambiguities or gaps.
They look at the manufacturing process and try and figure out if there are any better QA tests they can do.
They look at the design of the plane and see if there's anything that might have been overlooked as a possible issue.
by polonbike on 2/8/23, 4:53 PM
by phone8675309 on 2/8/23, 4:32 PM
by BryantD on 2/8/23, 5:57 PM
by justin_oaks on 2/8/23, 5:43 PM
I'd be interested in the cases when even a company that practices no-blame post-mortems has to fire the people who screw up multiple times.
by AnimalMuppet on 2/8/23, 6:17 PM
They celebrated these - like, a real celebration. But first they made sure that it really fit the definition.
by sodimel on 2/9/23, 8:02 AM
by Simon_O_Rourke on 2/8/23, 5:35 PM
by blablabla123 on 2/8/23, 5:22 PM
by giantg2 on 2/8/23, 4:59 PM
I don't. But I'm sure my bosses celebrate my failures since it makes their decision of who to give a bad rating to very easy.
by theflyingelvis on 2/8/23, 5:52 PM
Learning from failure makes complete sense, but not celebrating it.
by giraffe_lady on 2/8/23, 4:53 PM
by Fatnino on 2/8/23, 7:32 PM
by whoomp12342 on 2/8/23, 5:15 PM
by zabzonk on 2/8/23, 5:19 PM
oh no, i can remember. i once restarted a trading server process that could not easily be restarted once it crashed - crap code, not written by me, which caused quite a few problems. but that's about it.
by johnea on 2/8/23, 4:32 PM
Or maybe, you haven't ever worked in a real job?