It seems to me that there is yet another human bias at play here: storytelling. We try to make sense of things, to feel that things happen "for a reason." So, when we fail, we try to find the silver linings in it, to think that "the failure left me something." That's the story we want to hear, instead of "it was just a failure, I lost two years of my life."
Of course, in the "small bets" methodology you don't waste two years of your life, perhaps you loose two weeks or two months tops. But more crucially, you don't justify failure as a way of "getting lessons." We can also learn lessons from success, but very often we do not because we're very busy taking the next step; when we fail, there is a kind of void that is often used for "reflecting" about the lessons from the failure.
It's much more counterintuitive to just accept the failure and move on. It goes against our storytelling nature –but it's by far the best we can do.
Interesting piece about learning from failure. One thought is that if the chances of success are very low, then it's much harder to discern lessons. Another thought is about expectations. If you're looking for a needle in haystack, and all you find is hay - what lessons can you draw? 🤣
I think personal failure is squishy territory as its typically entwined with ego, self and other things.
Not a big sports guy myself, but understand in sports teams focus on "rewatching game tape" to learn from both success and failure. Similarly, I think in science an experimentation mindset is about testing hypothesis. A null hypothesis is a result.
That said, I understand the principle you outline viscerally. I was terrible in school and failed the 2nd grade. When I redid the 2nd grade I went from last in class to being in the top of the class. I always attributed this change to some kind of "hot hand" winning streak. But with distance and time I realize that I was 1.5 years younger than my peers in the second grade and all I needed is time to catch-up.
Its hard to watch your own "game tape" without it getting distorted. So in the end I do agree with your point to not over-index on failure.
I agree with you about not obsessing about failures. I also noticed that I've slipped into trying to explain why I failed and have been shifting back to focusing on successes this year.
I'd also add that when you notice you're focusing on failing, it can be due to a deeper issue of not feeling worthy of success, and you unconsciously pulling yourselves back to failure. Recognizing that and switching the mental states is the way forward.
Thanks for sharing that Rison. So much of it is a mental game. Not feeling worthy, all these things can sabotage us without us knowing. All the more reason to focus on the wins.
The detail that always bugged me: if we shouldn’t learn from failure because it could be just bad luck, wouldn’t that mean we shouldn’t do the same with wins too due to good luck?
I think you’re exactly right Jason that lady luck demands her dues in both directions.
While we might’ve gotten the win from a lot of luck, like those lucky planes that made it back, it’s a lot easier to see and dissect what about the win worked once we have it in hand. And build on top of it, or build more like it etc.
Trying to translate that analogy to software but struggling. In the case of software, we get data even if an app fails. It’s still there, it “made it back”. So how we can still dissect a fail right?
I’m with you on building on wins, in practice.. just this small contradictory detail that’s like a pebble in my cognitive shoe
I feel software is where this is most easily explainable.
Let’s say you build an app, for me one of those was ThreadX last year (a tool to get tweet and thread feedback), if my app got zero uses that’s a dead plane at the bottom of the ocean. Sure it’s there but I have no clue why it failed. Did users not want thread feedback? Is thread feedback a bad idea? Is it just Twitter in general changing things that caused the failure?
But the app got a few users. Made a few dollars. I had someone to talk to. I didn’t control that users found some value in it, i had a hunch and got a little lucky. I had the option to add more features those people wanted. I chose not to persue it because I wanted to chase other bets, felt it wasn’t all that big, but that’s on me falling out of love with it.
Recency bias works both ways. On the one hand, it can be very motivating when we experience success. But on the other hand, it can be really disheartening when we experience failure. So we need to be careful not to let recency bias control our behavior. Instead, we can focus on making small, consistent progress, even if it's not always immediately visible.
Great insights Louie!
It seems to me that there is yet another human bias at play here: storytelling. We try to make sense of things, to feel that things happen "for a reason." So, when we fail, we try to find the silver linings in it, to think that "the failure left me something." That's the story we want to hear, instead of "it was just a failure, I lost two years of my life."
Of course, in the "small bets" methodology you don't waste two years of your life, perhaps you loose two weeks or two months tops. But more crucially, you don't justify failure as a way of "getting lessons." We can also learn lessons from success, but very often we do not because we're very busy taking the next step; when we fail, there is a kind of void that is often used for "reflecting" about the lessons from the failure.
It's much more counterintuitive to just accept the failure and move on. It goes against our storytelling nature –but it's by far the best we can do.
Thanks Louie, take care!
Interesting piece about learning from failure. One thought is that if the chances of success are very low, then it's much harder to discern lessons. Another thought is about expectations. If you're looking for a needle in haystack, and all you find is hay - what lessons can you draw? 🤣
All good points. Wild odds in this game.
And if it hits a lot easier to build good things on a working base, increases the odds and so on.
Hey Louie,
I think personal failure is squishy territory as its typically entwined with ego, self and other things.
Not a big sports guy myself, but understand in sports teams focus on "rewatching game tape" to learn from both success and failure. Similarly, I think in science an experimentation mindset is about testing hypothesis. A null hypothesis is a result.
That said, I understand the principle you outline viscerally. I was terrible in school and failed the 2nd grade. When I redid the 2nd grade I went from last in class to being in the top of the class. I always attributed this change to some kind of "hot hand" winning streak. But with distance and time I realize that I was 1.5 years younger than my peers in the second grade and all I needed is time to catch-up.
Its hard to watch your own "game tape" without it getting distorted. So in the end I do agree with your point to not over-index on failure.
I agree with you about not obsessing about failures. I also noticed that I've slipped into trying to explain why I failed and have been shifting back to focusing on successes this year.
I'd also add that when you notice you're focusing on failing, it can be due to a deeper issue of not feeling worthy of success, and you unconsciously pulling yourselves back to failure. Recognizing that and switching the mental states is the way forward.
Thanks for sharing that Rison. So much of it is a mental game. Not feeling worthy, all these things can sabotage us without us knowing. All the more reason to focus on the wins.
True. Someone said, if you think about it.. it is like watering the seed.. it just grows..
the soil is good anyway. Careful with what you think about.
This was a good read. Thanks for sharing
As always, great writing there Louie.
The detail that always bugged me: if we shouldn’t learn from failure because it could be just bad luck, wouldn’t that mean we shouldn’t do the same with wins too due to good luck?
Louie Bacaj
just now
Author
I think you’re exactly right Jason that lady luck demands her dues in both directions.
While we might’ve gotten the win from a lot of luck, like those lucky planes that made it back, it’s a lot easier to see and dissect what about the win worked once we have it in hand. And build on top of it, or build more like it etc.
Trying to translate that analogy to software but struggling. In the case of software, we get data even if an app fails. It’s still there, it “made it back”. So how we can still dissect a fail right?
I’m with you on building on wins, in practice.. just this small contradictory detail that’s like a pebble in my cognitive shoe
I feel software is where this is most easily explainable.
Let’s say you build an app, for me one of those was ThreadX last year (a tool to get tweet and thread feedback), if my app got zero uses that’s a dead plane at the bottom of the ocean. Sure it’s there but I have no clue why it failed. Did users not want thread feedback? Is thread feedback a bad idea? Is it just Twitter in general changing things that caused the failure?
But the app got a few users. Made a few dollars. I had someone to talk to. I didn’t control that users found some value in it, i had a hunch and got a little lucky. I had the option to add more features those people wanted. I chose not to persue it because I wanted to chase other bets, felt it wasn’t all that big, but that’s on me falling out of love with it.
Is the upshot of this advice to just keep experimenting and trying things? Win or fail?
Thank you Louie. This was great!
Recency bias works both ways. On the one hand, it can be very motivating when we experience success. But on the other hand, it can be really disheartening when we experience failure. So we need to be careful not to let recency bias control our behavior. Instead, we can focus on making small, consistent progress, even if it's not always immediately visible.