Program evaluation services that increase program value for grantors, grantees, and communities. x

Archive for month: November, 2012

You are here: Home » » 2012 » November
November 7, 2012
07 Nov 2012

Fail Forward: What We Can Learn from Program “Failure”

Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian economist, sociologist, and philosopher, observed: “Give me a fruitful error any time, full of seeds, bursting with its own corrections. You can keep your sterile truth for yourself.” Programs frequently achieve some of their original goals, while missing others.  In some cases, they achieve unintended results, both desirable and undesirable.  In other cases, programs fail to achieve any of the original outcomes (i.e., changes, results) they intended at all.

Discovering New Information in Failure
Rather than identifying a program’s unachieved results as merely program failure, we need to rethink what we can learn from failures. What do program failures tell us about what we do that’s ineffective or otherwise misses the mark? By understanding how and why programs don’t achieve the results they intend, we can design and execute improved programs in the future. It is important to note that psychological research has shown that individuals learn more from failure than they do from success. Our goals should be to learn from our defeats and to surmount them—especially in programs that address critical social, educational, and human service needs. Learning from the challenges that confront these kinds of programs can have a powerful impact of the success of future programming.

Of course programs shouldn’t seek to fail, but they should seek to learn from the challenges that they encounter.  Constructive program evaluation can help organizations to learn what they need to be doing more effectively, and point the way to strengthened programming and enhanced results.  Constructive program evaluation identifies challenges, analyzes why such challenges detract from desired outcomes, and helps program sponsors and implementers to understand how to strengthen and refine programming so that the next iteration achieves its goals.

Brad Rose Consulting, Inc. is committed to conducting program evaluations that help program managers, funders, and stakeholders to ensure successful program design, accurately measure results, and make timely adjustments in order to maximize positive program impacts. To learn more about our commitment to learning from failure visit our Feedback & Continuous improvement page.

Samuel Becket wrote, “Ever tried.  Ever Failed.  No matter.  Try again. Fail again.  Fail better.”
See: “Embracing Failure,” an article at the Asian Development Bank
http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2010/embracing-failure.pdf

See also the website www.admittingfailure.com
*This post is indebted to a lively and productive discussion which appeared on the American Evaluation Association’s listserv October, 2012.
in Evaluation, Research /by /#permalink

Keywords

accountability actionable knowledge ai anecdotes Applicant Tracking Systems artificial intelligence assessment ATS authority automation Average basics beneficiaries bias bias in research big data Blended learning brandeis bureaucrazy Burnout busyness causation change charity charter schools cognitive bias collaboration College Admissions Scandal community foundations connections control group cost effectiveness COVID-19 data data collection data sources desired results developmental evaluation Digital technology in the classroom disadvantaged youth education educator emotional intelligence evaluation evaluation design evaluation findings Evaluation in complex environments evaluation questions evaluation research evaluation site visit evaluation vs. research evaluator skills evidence examples experience experimental design expertise external evaluator Flexwork focus groups formative evaluation formative evaluations Foundations funding game the system gaming the system gather data goals grantees Groups Groupthink helpful resources higher education Hustle culture Impact Evaluation In-groups integrity interpersonal interpersonal skills interview protocol Interviews Learning learning outcomes Learning to Learn lifelong learning logic model logic modeling manufacturing max weber Mean measure measures members Meritocracy methodology methods Metric metrics models needs assessment non-profit programs non-profits Nonprofits Normal objectivity objectivity in the Social Sciences observations OD On-line learning open-ended questions organizational culture organizational development organization development organizations Out-groups outcome evaluation outcome evaluations outcomes Pandemic Philanthrocapitalism Philanthropies philanthropy planning Politics post-test power power organization pre-test privacy problem solving process process evaluation process evaluations program program evaluation program funder programming programs progress Pros and Cons of technology in the classroom Public Education public school privatization public schools public school system purpose of education qualitative evaluation qualitative measures qualitative methods quality quantitative evaluation quantitative measure quantitative measures quantitative methods quantity quasi-experimental design questions randomized control trials rationalization RCTs reports research resources respondents robo-graders robots Roles school choice Schooling Schools site visit Social Credit System social entrepreneurs social innovation social research social robotics stakeholder analysis stakeholders standardized testing starting an evaluation Statistics strategic assessment strategic planning Summative Evaluation Surveillance survey data surveys Systems theory Systems thinking Systems thinking and evaluation teachers teams Telecommuting The cult of busyness theories Thought partner tips tools treatment group types of evaluation variables workflow Working from home work teams world without work

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon

Sign up for our Email Newsletter

Copyright © 2020 - Brad Rose Consulting