New Acronym blogger, Peter O’Neill reflects about the Cirque du Soleil performance he saw, tying it back to organizational issues (as Lyn Heward did at the Annual Meeting in Boston). I particularly liked this observation:
Risky moves, when flubbed, were always celebrated.
I read about this in the business literature. I think it was Jack Welch who was famous for making a decision that resulted in a building being destroyed, or some other multi-million dollar mistake—but he was praised for it, and they learned from it, etc., etc.
But at the micro level, when we’re trying to get things done in the office (as opposed to impressing an audience with a triple flip), we simply don’t celebrate risky moves that fail. I know that’s a generalization (with duly noted exceptions), but it makes me think more about Scott Briscoe’s recent comment to my post where he talks about being “right.” (Scott, by the way, expanded a bit on this topic in a second comment. And I promise to read the interview with Jim Collins in the new Associations Now).
If we know what is supposed to happen (you’re supposed to launch that program, get enough people to register, and bring in enough money to cover the costs), then if we don’t do it, it’s just a failure. It isn’t usually seen as a “risky” move that flubbed, because we did our research, we made our pitch, we insisted we were “right.” We only invest resources if we’re “right.” For God’s sake, it was in the strategic plan!
Seriously, we invest a lot in being right, and that makes celebration of “wrong” very difficult, so we don’t do it, even when the management books (and live shows) make a compelling case about how important it is. I think we need to look more closely at what being “right” means.
Comments