This culture of failure being the same as success was born with the mommy tunnel at sports meets when kids were little.
No one kept score, every one was a winner, and the kids, all went under a tunnel made of the arms of their mommys, and every one gets an award.
Then there is real life, and they get shreded to pieces. What is surprising is how they feel that this is a good thing.
This is not a good thing. At all. And it will only change when the investors start adding a clause to contracts that says the looser has to return the investment
moneys.
Until then, every one is a winner, and every one gets an award. Except the dumb idiots who bet their retirement on your great idea, and now have to work until they die just so they can eat, because you just wasted their money.
No one kept score, every one was a winner, and the kids, all went under a tunnel made of the arms of their mommys, and every one gets an award.
Then there is real life, and they get shreded to pieces. What is surprising is how they feel that this is a good thing.
This is not a good thing. At all. And it will only change when the investors start adding a clause to contracts that says the looser has to return the investment
moneys.
Until then, every one is a winner, and every one gets an award. Except the dumb idiots who bet their retirement on your great idea, and now have to work until they die just so they can eat, because you just wasted their money.
31
Lahey's book is destined to go on the shelves next to such worthy tomes as "Dow 36,000". For all its angst about "failing up" and the advantages accruing to kids at elite colleges or former managers at failed startups, the window is drawing to a close on that era. Look at the unicorns starting to crash down around us, the scandal at Zenefits, etc.
What we went thru is another tech mania just like the one in the late 90's. Remember Webvan and Pets.com? This time around it was apps rather than websites, but all of a sudden there was a fortune to be made by letting people set up friends online, do searches, send messages, etc. The author of this review (Kate Losse) wrote a book about Facebook and her experience of being in the right place at the right time (she wasn't even an engineer, but being employee #51 has no doubt led to riches).
The point is that with fortunes to be made and people desperate to get their companies going, any warm body willing to help out and seen as marginally able to contribute (Kate Losse, for example) would be snapped up. Along with this came myths such as "fail upward". With more jobs available than people to fill them, someone who had at least worked in the field seems like a safer bet than someone without any experience.
This era is ending, and you can bet that the surviving companies are going to take a closer look when hiring. Including asking why a previous company collapsed and if someone's lack of skills pushed it along.
What we went thru is another tech mania just like the one in the late 90's. Remember Webvan and Pets.com? This time around it was apps rather than websites, but all of a sudden there was a fortune to be made by letting people set up friends online, do searches, send messages, etc. The author of this review (Kate Losse) wrote a book about Facebook and her experience of being in the right place at the right time (she wasn't even an engineer, but being employee #51 has no doubt led to riches).
The point is that with fortunes to be made and people desperate to get their companies going, any warm body willing to help out and seen as marginally able to contribute (Kate Losse, for example) would be snapped up. Along with this came myths such as "fail upward". With more jobs available than people to fill them, someone who had at least worked in the field seems like a safer bet than someone without any experience.
This era is ending, and you can bet that the surviving companies are going to take a closer look when hiring. Including asking why a previous company collapsed and if someone's lack of skills pushed it along.
15
“If you ‘fail fast’ and you don’t have the right demographics, the right safety net, you just fail.”
Thanks for identifying the important caveat in this feel-good slogan. The fail-fast myth is a part of how influential people make money encouraging risks that can do a lot of damage if you're not already part of the in crowd.
Thanks for identifying the important caveat in this feel-good slogan. The fail-fast myth is a part of how influential people make money encouraging risks that can do a lot of damage if you're not already part of the in crowd.
36
'...Thanks, in part, to a playlist of TED talks on the productivity of failure, the dictum to “fail harder, fail faster” is now being peddled in fields from scientific research to elementary education...'
That quote comes from Thomas Edison, who said "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
Odd that this is not mentioned in the article.
That quote comes from Thomas Edison, who said "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
Odd that this is not mentioned in the article.
5
Blowback on the uncritical acceptance of a mainstream-emerging contrarian theme like failure’s acceptability is to be expected. The article ends with a healthy and often missing nuance. It helps us understand the important point that some types of failure aid future success; whereas other types just means incompetence. This type of cycle needs to be repeated in other areas as part of the pursuit of innovation (which, itself, needs to be “more diverse”).
One can be learned from “Failure is subjective.” Yes it is, but so are a lot of things seen as objective, such as its apparent opposite: success. A lot of what are seen as certainties could similarly be questioned as the result of our need for explanation. These can be influenced by confirmation bias, selective attention, and absorbed social narratives about how an actually complex world works.
The full “why” story is usually unknowable. Even as we accept those parts we think we understand, we should at least realize that in most cases they are only parts, and even their accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaking of “parts,” can we question the uncritical narrative seen in this and many NYT articles that there is, in reality, any such thing as “white men,” whom are boxed together, with numerous assumed “privileges,” by those with no knowledge of our specific situations or obstacles we face?
If we must judge, wasn’t the gold standard to first put ourselves in others’ shoes, and by assessing their individual characters?
One can be learned from “Failure is subjective.” Yes it is, but so are a lot of things seen as objective, such as its apparent opposite: success. A lot of what are seen as certainties could similarly be questioned as the result of our need for explanation. These can be influenced by confirmation bias, selective attention, and absorbed social narratives about how an actually complex world works.
The full “why” story is usually unknowable. Even as we accept those parts we think we understand, we should at least realize that in most cases they are only parts, and even their accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaking of “parts,” can we question the uncritical narrative seen in this and many NYT articles that there is, in reality, any such thing as “white men,” whom are boxed together, with numerous assumed “privileges,” by those with no knowledge of our specific situations or obstacles we face?
If we must judge, wasn’t the gold standard to first put ourselves in others’ shoes, and by assessing their individual characters?
5
"Life isn't fair", as noted celebrity John F. Kennedy observed about himself and his world not too many years before he was murdered in cold blood while seated next to his lovely, celebrity wife. As for our modern day failure culture this ancient aphorism, source unknown, "often wrong but never in doubt" basically encompasses today's self-serving, fatuous Silicon Valley Bible Study Lesson.
Old wine in new bottles. "Who dares, wins". Hence Frederick the Great's "l'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!", probably seconding Alexander. And Caesar's observation about himself in his profession: "success is mostly chance", if only because "if it can possibly go wrong, it will".
Not that Failure should be gilded like a lily and placed upon a pedestal, because despite Silicon Valley entrepreneurs' genuflection towards that altar, the High Altar of Failure, it truly is an empty chalice. Empty chalice and false god. That's because in the actual real world "failure is not an option", so succinctly put by the late NASA launch director Gene Kranz, all protestations to the contrary, in part because "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser", Gen. Patton, but mainly because "the penalty for failure is destruction", a pithy, timeless lesson Stone Age hunters painted on cave walls.
Old wine in new bottles. "Who dares, wins". Hence Frederick the Great's "l'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!", probably seconding Alexander. And Caesar's observation about himself in his profession: "success is mostly chance", if only because "if it can possibly go wrong, it will".
Not that Failure should be gilded like a lily and placed upon a pedestal, because despite Silicon Valley entrepreneurs' genuflection towards that altar, the High Altar of Failure, it truly is an empty chalice. Empty chalice and false god. That's because in the actual real world "failure is not an option", so succinctly put by the late NASA launch director Gene Kranz, all protestations to the contrary, in part because "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser", Gen. Patton, but mainly because "the penalty for failure is destruction", a pithy, timeless lesson Stone Age hunters painted on cave walls.
4
Failure is an experienced gained and it has neither the texture of color or race. Everyone can fail and how you leverage it is an individual perpespctive as well as skill.
To taint failure with other attributes is a chimerical response & perpetuates a myth that isn't tenable? I don't understand how privilege overcomes a zero bank balance, destroyed credit profile, failed relationships and other issues that also come with failure.
To personify a few examples that show a different trajectory of recovery from failure is an exercise in shaping a narrative that is inherently unfair. Many have failed with a few having recovered which doesn't personify privilege for all.
The risks taken do not have a political underpinning or an agenda & is a pure entrepreneurial journey based on experience and knowledge. If privilege is associated with this journey then the efforts of thousands of minority entrepreneurs is being depreciated to shape a biased agenda.
As a minority person I am tired of being told that a risk undertaken,whether successful or not, to become an entrepreneur is being correlated to an expedient political narrative that plays to the gallery.
To taint failure with other attributes is a chimerical response & perpetuates a myth that isn't tenable? I don't understand how privilege overcomes a zero bank balance, destroyed credit profile, failed relationships and other issues that also come with failure.
To personify a few examples that show a different trajectory of recovery from failure is an exercise in shaping a narrative that is inherently unfair. Many have failed with a few having recovered which doesn't personify privilege for all.
The risks taken do not have a political underpinning or an agenda & is a pure entrepreneurial journey based on experience and knowledge. If privilege is associated with this journey then the efforts of thousands of minority entrepreneurs is being depreciated to shape a biased agenda.
As a minority person I am tired of being told that a risk undertaken,whether successful or not, to become an entrepreneur is being correlated to an expedient political narrative that plays to the gallery.
5
The issue is that many, many people are living their lives in a failed state, that will never help them to rise above. Failing in their economic lives is what most Americans have been experiencing for decades now, its simply that the Debt Industry allows them to stay relatively afloat. But most will never see their failure trip them up the ladder, as the system is set against them from the outset.
No one is looking at these built-in systemic failures as positives. These people are labeled Losers by the media, the "success prophets", and the TED talk crowd of sycophants. If you cant make a million, and lose 10, by the time your 25, you are an abject loser, and one of the untouchables of society. As a culture we're obsessed with worshiping the pipe dream of excessive success - attainable all by simply pulling ever so harder on ones bootstraps. So people keep pulling, and pulling...taunted and seduced by the lure of excessive success, that will one day come - as promised, if you fail enough times but never, ever give up pulling on those long ago frayed bootstraps.
The reality is the narrowly defined industries where this failing upwards might actually work, and only infrequently, are not fully open to most average Americans.
No one is looking at these built-in systemic failures as positives. These people are labeled Losers by the media, the "success prophets", and the TED talk crowd of sycophants. If you cant make a million, and lose 10, by the time your 25, you are an abject loser, and one of the untouchables of society. As a culture we're obsessed with worshiping the pipe dream of excessive success - attainable all by simply pulling ever so harder on ones bootstraps. So people keep pulling, and pulling...taunted and seduced by the lure of excessive success, that will one day come - as promised, if you fail enough times but never, ever give up pulling on those long ago frayed bootstraps.
The reality is the narrowly defined industries where this failing upwards might actually work, and only infrequently, are not fully open to most average Americans.
9
Outside the narrow world of privileged entrepreneurs (and perhaps a few other equally unrepresentative niches), there exists a world of people for whom one failure of corresponding proportions can lead to a hard fall from the middle class, or eviction, or prison. For 90% of the American people, "failing upward" is a fantasy.
We have somehow crafted an ideology that reframes serial failure in entrepreneurship as noble. It's pretty remarkable, when you think about it. Perhaps the avatars of failure can spare some effort to help soften the moral opprobium associated with the exact same performance everywhere else in America.
We have somehow crafted an ideology that reframes serial failure in entrepreneurship as noble. It's pretty remarkable, when you think about it. Perhaps the avatars of failure can spare some effort to help soften the moral opprobium associated with the exact same performance everywhere else in America.
45
"Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett
1
Race has nothing to do with this, it's whether or not you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth...
That aside, I have never understood the desire to start a company via funding from venture capitalists, that is a sure way to completely and quickly lose control of your vision.
The Internet, like no other, facilitates the ability to slowly grow a good idea to fruition without requiring vast amounts of capital up front. So many untold billions of dollars have been wasted on half-baked startup ideas rushed out with venture capitalist money, need I mention Outpost.com, and there a many, many more.
I am starting a company and have a good vision of where it will be in 10 years with hard work, persistence and yes, even some good fortune thrown in. I absolutely refuse venture capital of any kind, nor will my company, if successful, ever become publicly traded as my goal is to contribute to society by actually creating something that produces tangible products that make people happy. Not to be one of the leeches only interested in multiplying dollars by any means necessary.
Wall St. certainly has its place, and I am an investor myself, but I will never cede control of my business to a bunch of Yahoos only interested in making dollars on dollars and producing nothing whatsoever. That is not the American Entrepreneur spirit as I understand it.
That aside, I have never understood the desire to start a company via funding from venture capitalists, that is a sure way to completely and quickly lose control of your vision.
The Internet, like no other, facilitates the ability to slowly grow a good idea to fruition without requiring vast amounts of capital up front. So many untold billions of dollars have been wasted on half-baked startup ideas rushed out with venture capitalist money, need I mention Outpost.com, and there a many, many more.
I am starting a company and have a good vision of where it will be in 10 years with hard work, persistence and yes, even some good fortune thrown in. I absolutely refuse venture capital of any kind, nor will my company, if successful, ever become publicly traded as my goal is to contribute to society by actually creating something that produces tangible products that make people happy. Not to be one of the leeches only interested in multiplying dollars by any means necessary.
Wall St. certainly has its place, and I am an investor myself, but I will never cede control of my business to a bunch of Yahoos only interested in making dollars on dollars and producing nothing whatsoever. That is not the American Entrepreneur spirit as I understand it.
8
There is much more of "this story" than Ms. Losse had space to write. It is critically important to enter the entrepreneur/innovative world "prior to quitting your day job." Most new businesses of any kind fail, since two major issues occur. Collection is poor and the ability to make timely payment on expenses (and bills in general) is weak.
When there is confidence that the paying Client-base is stable (preferably growing), then consideration can be made to transition into the new venture on more than just "a hobby basis." It also must be stated that unless one is willing to embrace "the 168 hour work week", then please don't quit your day job.
When your Clients are two or more time zones away or in Europe or in Asia, the entrepreneur/innovator must be available or to have competent staff available during the normal business hours on the ground. Otherwise, please don't bother. Competition is such that high-quality performance is more important than ever.
With the advent of modern technology, work is more do-able for a variety of Clients on multiple platforms than ever. My confidence is based on encouraging people from all walks of life to do what you love to do. When properly managed, someone will be pay for what you are making, selling, etc. At this point, it isn't work, it's a calling.
When there is confidence that the paying Client-base is stable (preferably growing), then consideration can be made to transition into the new venture on more than just "a hobby basis." It also must be stated that unless one is willing to embrace "the 168 hour work week", then please don't quit your day job.
When your Clients are two or more time zones away or in Europe or in Asia, the entrepreneur/innovator must be available or to have competent staff available during the normal business hours on the ground. Otherwise, please don't bother. Competition is such that high-quality performance is more important than ever.
With the advent of modern technology, work is more do-able for a variety of Clients on multiple platforms than ever. My confidence is based on encouraging people from all walks of life to do what you love to do. When properly managed, someone will be pay for what you are making, selling, etc. At this point, it isn't work, it's a calling.
1
Failing upward? This sounds like Donald Trump sans innovation.
4
I'd like to make a HUGE point here: So much about failing upwards depends on how much personal money the entrepreneur has put into his / her own startup. If you are able to raise funding from sources outside yourself - when you fail - you can restart relatively easily. Jhamar Youngblood knows what I'm talking about here. If you can't raise it - you have to pony up yourself. Failing upward with OTHER PEOPLES MONEY is a fantasy for most of us entrepreneurs.
50
It's not just race that affects ones ability to raise money. Women also don't have access to capital.
17
It's laudable for trying, but it's crass to boast about failures as if they are success, unless you can really demonstrate that you've learnt from those past mistakes. The oft cited famous case(s) in point, was Steve Job's spectacular ouster from Apple and his more spectacular comeback, again and again. How many of these so-called entrepreneurs can come close to that, one has to wonder.
These days, everyone, even a dog, calls themselves an entrepreneur.
These days, everyone, even a dog, calls themselves an entrepreneur.
13
The whole idea of "failing fast" is now being codified/adopted by many, including education. I hope the new "prophets" don't cherry pick the successes. The best educators are the ones who have actually failed, not the ones selling the message.
Also, the "failures" referenced in the article involve failing using other people's money. What if there were different stakes involved? What about failing with your own money? What if failure meant the collapse of skyscraper?
Would we still be celebrating "failure" in these cases?
Also, the "failures" referenced in the article involve failing using other people's money. What if there were different stakes involved? What about failing with your own money? What if failure meant the collapse of skyscraper?
Would we still be celebrating "failure" in these cases?
6
This is a religion, right? A faith-based thing? Where the more you sin, the more god loves you?
No, this really just sounds like a small cabal of somehow-connected young white men who we will be reading about in 15 years or so that will be raided by the Gov on RICO charges.
What clued me in? The phrase, "...an inherently privileged concept..."
OH! No wonder it made no sense! It's an "Inherently Privileged Concept"! The author left off the caps, that's why I was confused. The IPC... yes, I get it now. It's a Class B Ruling Concept that caroms off the Class A Ruling Concepts of Racism and Sexism ( the Skin Ruling Concept and the Genital Ruling Concept) that ultimately lands one on the front page of the NYTimes, but not to worry, for the charges will be dropped and THAT ricochet will posit them in the Charles Colson School of HasBeen But Well Taken Care Of, Thank You.
They'll be fine.
...and, Kate: Remember next time to capitalize. These aren't simply nouns... they are PROPER nouns! ; ).
No, this really just sounds like a small cabal of somehow-connected young white men who we will be reading about in 15 years or so that will be raided by the Gov on RICO charges.
What clued me in? The phrase, "...an inherently privileged concept..."
OH! No wonder it made no sense! It's an "Inherently Privileged Concept"! The author left off the caps, that's why I was confused. The IPC... yes, I get it now. It's a Class B Ruling Concept that caroms off the Class A Ruling Concepts of Racism and Sexism ( the Skin Ruling Concept and the Genital Ruling Concept) that ultimately lands one on the front page of the NYTimes, but not to worry, for the charges will be dropped and THAT ricochet will posit them in the Charles Colson School of HasBeen But Well Taken Care Of, Thank You.
They'll be fine.
...and, Kate: Remember next time to capitalize. These aren't simply nouns... they are PROPER nouns! ; ).
2
Winning isn't what it's all about, but failing with a sense of dignity and sel-respect. (William Gaddis?)
2
Count on the NYT to drag race into EVERYTHING.
Yes, being connected to potential investors is necessary to get them to invest. But they don't care what an entrepreneur's skin color is, so long as he convinces them they can make money. That's what it is all about.
Yes, being connected to potential investors is necessary to get them to invest. But they don't care what an entrepreneur's skin color is, so long as he convinces them they can make money. That's what it is all about.
2
Some of us will fail at failing? You can't win.
3
So basically well connected white people who come from one or two business schools with the same philosophies can fail upward while everybody else gets one shot. This also applies to the political, financial, academic, and tech world.
I don't see how this can possibly go wrong.
I don't see how this can possibly go wrong.
93
Its well connected white men, women still have a hard time raising money. White men have most of it.
3
By definition, the pro-failure crowd is engaged in relatively inconsequential activity. I'm a structural engineer. No one would advise me to "fail hard, fail often." No one's singing the praises of Flint's water engineering failures.
It would be great if today's young engineers had the ambition to work on projects where success truly mattered, and failure meant more than not selling people consumer goods off the internet.
It would be great if today's young engineers had the ambition to work on projects where success truly mattered, and failure meant more than not selling people consumer goods off the internet.
176
I can't agree with you more. Imagine we tell those in NASA to fail hard, fail often, in the many space missions (eg. manned mission to Mars).
These days, we tend to self-congratulate ourselves for anything, so long as we're sharing every single tidbits. Looking back, it might have started with Oprah, where anyone who professed apology on the show should and would be forgiven, along the way, they were congratulated for "having the courage" to tell the world of their faults and failures. These so-called "fault con" and every other guy on the web that do the same these days are simply magnifying what was done on Oprah in years past, to reach larger audience, for both self-promotion and self-congratulation.
These days, we tend to self-congratulate ourselves for anything, so long as we're sharing every single tidbits. Looking back, it might have started with Oprah, where anyone who professed apology on the show should and would be forgiven, along the way, they were congratulated for "having the courage" to tell the world of their faults and failures. These so-called "fault con" and every other guy on the web that do the same these days are simply magnifying what was done on Oprah in years past, to reach larger audience, for both self-promotion and self-congratulation.
14
Well, thank YOU for doing meaningful work, and hear hear for your insightful comment on the silliness of most of what Silicon Valley has to offer.
13
I am a scientist and this is my field of research. Less than 1% of startups are funded, but, according to US census 76% of US businesses, or 23 million, had no employees, and do not require funding (in 2014) - they are diverse, a greater proportion of women and minorities than in those that employ staff. This failure you speak of is imprecise - it failure to get investment to test on a new product, or innovation, that must disrupt the macro-economy with creative destruction. It does not speak to the vast majority of entrepreneurs who do not do this. Also, there were over 32,000 who earn over $1 million, and collectively they earn over £1.05 trillion, these are "successful" people. To be clear, I am not arguing that Mr Shellhammer is playing a game that is stacked against him, I am just pointing out that there is a much bigger game at work outside of the valley where those rules do not apply.
6
This article jumbles anecdotes and quotes and misstates the effect of failure on careers in science and engineering. I think it's important to separate failure in business start-ups from failure in science and engineering technology.
Scientific proposals are reviewed partially on the ability of the investigator to produce a positive outcome, e.g., to validate a conjecture or hypothesis. A long string of failures does not give a reviewer or funding agency much confidence in an investigator. Similarly, if I'm a hiring manager, I need to see a few successes on an engineer's resume. Otherwise, I doubt if the applicant has the soft and hard skills to delivery on their promises. These observations are based on 35+ years in science and engineering (both industry and university).
"A happy engineer" doesn't exist. Most people cannot tolerate their morose dispositions. Things are always broken. :-)
Scientific proposals are reviewed partially on the ability of the investigator to produce a positive outcome, e.g., to validate a conjecture or hypothesis. A long string of failures does not give a reviewer or funding agency much confidence in an investigator. Similarly, if I'm a hiring manager, I need to see a few successes on an engineer's resume. Otherwise, I doubt if the applicant has the soft and hard skills to delivery on their promises. These observations are based on 35+ years in science and engineering (both industry and university).
"A happy engineer" doesn't exist. Most people cannot tolerate their morose dispositions. Things are always broken. :-)
5
Failing upward successfully mostly works in a very narrow field - the one where someone writes an app with a clever business plan that gets hyped and rapidly develops high valuation (by someone or many) - then crashes quickly. The type of investment of time and career required is minimal and the individual can try again on some other clever enterprise. In areas that require deep scientific or technological investment, this does not work so well. Often, long periods of time, huge amounts of efforts, and whole careers all caught up in such enterprises, especially science. Even on the entrepreneurial aspect, things like developing drugs and treatments are far more demanding and there is much less room for failure.
41
Drug discovery and development is a failure filled field. The traditional Pharma "throw it to the wall and see if sticks" approach has been an utter failure in recent years/decades. The low hanging fruit has been plucked and the paradigm based on efficacy first and toxicity second isn't working out. This is why it costs $2.3 billion on average per new drug (according to a study from Tufts: csdd.tufts.edu).
Half way through the article, I started to wonder if I was reading about Silicon Valley or Pro Sports. The NFL, NBA, AND MLB have set the standard for decades in re-hiring coaches who previously failed, many repeatedly, but are part of the "fraternity".
29
For some reason this article reminded me of a Cheers episode where Sam meets a group of very wealthy men at a party for his bartender's rich girl friend, Kelly Gaines. He over hears them talk about investments and invests with them only to later discover that they are so rich they purposely invest in stocks to see who will lose the most money!
The moral of the story is that the rich can afford failure. Unfortunately the Sam Malones of the world have no such luxury.
The moral of the story is that the rich can afford failure. Unfortunately the Sam Malones of the world have no such luxury.
59
Back in 1989, having become bored working as a pharmacist and having some knowledge of DME( durable medical equipment), I starting a DME retail business next to a Walgreens. For the first few years the store did quite well. But because most of my sales and rentals involved billing 3rd parties like Medicare, Medicaid and insurance companies, cash flow became a real problem and I had to borrow more than I wanted to.. The economy soured in the late nineties and the loans came due and to top it off, Walgreens moved which resulted in a decline in sales. I eventually closed the business after losing a good deal of money.......But the thing is, even though I failed, I am glad I did it. It was fun, like playing a game but with real money. It is like the old saying " Better to have loved and lost than not to have loved at all."
9
A Fairly Honorable Defeat.
"Jhamar Youngblood, an African-American entrepreneur, told me. He is working on his third start-up, a messaging application called Blastchat, after he was unable to raise money for his first two.
“What counts as failure is subjective,” he said. “For people like me, failure is not being able to raise $100,000, and then when I go to angel investors seeking funding, they ask me if I’ve raised any money. It’s like I’ve already failed because of the color of my skin and not having my own networks to provide resources" quote is from the article.
have you contacted oprah or the CEO of BET or professional black athletes making millions of dollars/year or rich white liberals?
blaming the color of your skin is an excuse and a poor one at that.
“What counts as failure is subjective,” he said. “For people like me, failure is not being able to raise $100,000, and then when I go to angel investors seeking funding, they ask me if I’ve raised any money. It’s like I’ve already failed because of the color of my skin and not having my own networks to provide resources" quote is from the article.
have you contacted oprah or the CEO of BET or professional black athletes making millions of dollars/year or rich white liberals?
blaming the color of your skin is an excuse and a poor one at that.
11
Because as we all know, BET and your NBA players are well known venture capital firms. You may as well tell him to take Mitt Romney's suggestion of borrowing money from his parents to start a business, for all the relevance and dismissiveness your "advice" actually has (which is to say none). Or you can just save a step and rather than offer supposed advice just make the subtext of your post the actual text, namely: "black people pointing out that white people have certain advantages by virtue of their skin color makes me deeply uncomfortable and respond with irrational and irrelevant platitudes."
24
CUNY was supposed to be our ticket out of poverty, but the computer science department at the graduate center was lilly white and nearly all male. Want to cover my complaint, which remains open? It's not too late to save the next generation.
11
And what does that have to do with it? Were they refusing to accept applicants who weren't "lilly white and nearly all male"? Grading them more harshly?
1
Many years ago, I went to a Tom Peters (remember him?) weekend workshop. A main topic was how management should encourage failure & learning from failure within the organization. Even then, for most of the Palo Alto engineering types it was, "like duh, tell me something I don't know". The only holdouts, who were absolutely unwavering in their conviction that failure was unacceptable, were a group of engineers from Volkswagen.
8
but then how do you explain the excellent reputation of German engineering to the point where price consideration for German products is of secondary or tertiary importance for people/businesses who want only the very best.
3
The people doing the worst things succeed. Those who pollute the environment succeed. Good people always seem to finish last. Where is the virtue in the people? You can't have a good government with a country full of racists.
1
Time to disrupt pattern matching. Real capitalists would not fund serial failures or divert capital to friends or acquaintances.
13
This put me in mind of Dylan's mid sixties lyric:
In the dime stores and bus stations
People talk of situations
Read books, repeat quotations
Draw conclusions on the wall
Some speak of the future
My love she speaks softly
She knows there’s no success like failure
And that failure’s no success at all.
-- from Love Minus Zero, No Limit
Bob Dylan
In the dime stores and bus stations
People talk of situations
Read books, repeat quotations
Draw conclusions on the wall
Some speak of the future
My love she speaks softly
She knows there’s no success like failure
And that failure’s no success at all.
-- from Love Minus Zero, No Limit
Bob Dylan
15
These "entrepreneurs" are failing with other people's money. The venture capitalists have money to burn. It's a nice world they live in, unlike anywhere else, there is no personal risk for any of them playing with excess capital. There are a lot of people out there taking personal business risks that end in bankruptcy and worse.
Write a blog post. Get another $2 million. So sad for them.
Write a blog post. Get another $2 million. So sad for them.
51
Ok -- so I read the article anyway.
4
Gack! I stopped reading when I got to TedTalks.
Am I the only person in the U.S. that finds this new so-called "documentary" form to be full of simplistic thinking? They never present the speakers credentials or document ANYTHING but we're suppose to accept them as "experts speaking the gospel truth. I can't abide them. Full of silly platitudes all served up in nice, brief, Sesame-Street-length, non-attention-span-straining bites. Bleck.
Maybe if some of these losers spent some time--*gasp*--READING something longer than a blog post and talking to their fellow human beings, they wouldn't be losers.
Am I the only person in the U.S. that finds this new so-called "documentary" form to be full of simplistic thinking? They never present the speakers credentials or document ANYTHING but we're suppose to accept them as "experts speaking the gospel truth. I can't abide them. Full of silly platitudes all served up in nice, brief, Sesame-Street-length, non-attention-span-straining bites. Bleck.
Maybe if some of these losers spent some time--*gasp*--READING something longer than a blog post and talking to their fellow human beings, they wouldn't be losers.
65
I also think TED talks are way overrated. I have found a few to be useful and/or inspirational, but only a few.
Last year I was working with a group on some meetings to educate community leaders about an issue. When we were trying to decide what format we wanted to follow someone suggested we do it like a TED talk. My response was that it would cost a lot more money than we had to spend and that none of us would come across well in that format. Of course, the person who suggested the TED talk format was the person who knew the least about the topic and tries to dazzle you with baloney.
Last year I was working with a group on some meetings to educate community leaders about an issue. When we were trying to decide what format we wanted to follow someone suggested we do it like a TED talk. My response was that it would cost a lot more money than we had to spend and that none of us would come across well in that format. Of course, the person who suggested the TED talk format was the person who knew the least about the topic and tries to dazzle you with baloney.
11
3
That's quite the shallow analysis. Oh, and by virtue of the fact that guest speakers are speaking to an audience, and the networking that often leads to new ideas and partnerships, and the inspiring education attendees get from the greater conference, the value of Ted Talks is evident to all but those who won't be missed.
Wall Streeters are handling SO much money, with SO little risk or regulation that it's the very worst kind of throw-away, manic gambling for their clients. It's as if retirees and institutional money managers are in a high-stakes, winner-take-all poker game blindfolded and gagged with no control over the outcomes. It has nothing to do with "smarts" or "success" - the same BIG BOYS pick the winners and losers for sport. And we rely on it to measure OUR economy? How stupid can we be? We continue every day to be shocked as we learn the answer to that.
65
What tends to be overlooked in this discussion which - as you say - is en vogue in tech as well as social entrepreneurship is: the survivor bias. We hear about the one, two maybe three percent that come back. We don't hear from those who lose income, home and marriage/family. Those who struggle just to find a salaried job afterwards. Their story remains untold, doesn't fit the American dream or is just plain "unsexy". Starting a business from scratch is an exhausting experience and very few have an appetite to try it again after failing "downward". Yes, it is absolutely right to not castigate failure as is mostly the case in Europe. But it isn't necessarily good to propagate it either. "Fail fast, fail often" is just plain nonsense spread mostly by people who never started a business themselves.