Abstract

Failure is an inevitable feature of innovation, and management research promulgates the importance of learning from it. Key to excelling at an innovation‐based strategy is understanding the processes that can turn failures into successes. However, post‐failure success remains elusive. Although failure signals that the innovation journey is off course, shifting trajectory is difficult, because it may require revising assumptions and reformulating the project’s problem representation. Using comparative case studies, this study set out to understand how problem representations are reformulated. Employing case method and comparing data versus theory iteratively, the important role of sensemaking and of leadership behaviors in driving post‐failure success became salient. Findings show that problem representations post‐failure require a process of problem formulation characterized by sensemaking and that innovative solutions are enabled by the reformulation of problem representations that spring from prospective sensemaking. Furthermore, this article identifies leadership change behavior as the linchpin driving a problem formulation process characterized by prospective sensemaking that catalyzes innovative solutions and explains why some projects thrive post‐failure and others do not. This article provides empirical support to the theoretical work of the literature on problem formulation, while extending the learning‐from‐failure literature by emphasizing and demonstrating the process driving post‐failure success. The major implication of our study is that different leadership behaviors may foster different types of sensemaking (retrospective or prospective), and that, in turn, the type of sensemaking matters for how a problem is reformulated. Ultimately, this article concludes that in the context of project failure, problem reformulation that springs from prospective sensemaking enables innovative solutions post‐failure.

Highlights

  • We explored innovation project failures, problem formulation post-failure, and how problem representations may or may not lead to productive outcomes

  • Sensemaking is an important mechanism of problem formulation post-failure

  • A reformulated problem representation, which is the outcome of problem formulation characterized by retrospective and prospective sensemaking, is a necessary antecedent of innovative solutions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The consensus is that failure is “an important experience from which learning can take place” Widespread avoidance of failure has been replaced by a focus on learning from it (Sitkin, 1992), with an emphasis on demystifying and codifying the processes that facilitates identification and analysis of failures (Cannon and Edmondson, 2001, 2005). Given the prominence of failures in innovation, understanding the processes that facilitates identification and analysis of failures is certainly important; it is insufficient. The key to excelling at an innovation-based strategy is understanding the processes that can turn failures into successes. A failure refers to a “deviation from expected and desired results”

Methods
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call