| Revision as of 03:45, 1 January 2008 view sourceT-borg (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers9,451 editsm revert (not the category)← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:41, 1 January 2008 view source 75.65.240.50 (talk) →Criteria for failureNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| == Criteria for failure == | == Criteria for failure == | ||
| The criteria for failure are heavily dependent on context of use, and may be ] to a particular ] or ]. A situation considered to be a failure by one might be considered a success by another, particularly in cases of direct ] or a ] ]. As well, the degree of success or failure in a situation may be differently viewed by distinct observers or participants, such that a situation that one considers to be a failure, another might consider to be a success, a qualified success or a neutral situation. | The criteria for failure are heavily dependent on context of use, and may be ] to a particular ] or ]. A situation considered to be a failure by one might be considered a success by another, particularly in cases of direct ] or a ] ]. As well, the degree of success or failure in a situation may be differently viewed by distinct observers or participants, such that a situation that one considers to be a failure, another might consider to be a success, a qualified success or a neutral situation. | ||
| It may also be difficult or impossible to ascertain whether a situation meets criteria for failure or success due to ambiguous or ill-defined definition of those criteria. Finding useful and effective criteria, or ]s, to judge the success or failure of a situation may itself be a significant task. | It may also be difficult or impossible to ascertain whether a situation meets criteria for failure or success due to ambiguous or ill-defined definition of those criteria. Finding useful and effective criteria, or ]s, to judge the success or failure of a situation may itself be a significant task. If you fail, you suck. End of story. | ||
| == Flavors of failure == | == Flavors of failure == | ||
Revision as of 18:41, 1 January 2008
"Fail" and "Phail" redirect here. For Failure, see Fail (disambiguation).Failure (or flop) in general refers to the state or condition of not meeting a desirable or intended objective. It may be viewed as the opposite of success.
Criteria for failure
The criteria for failure are heavily dependent on context of use, and may be relative to a particular observer or belief system. A situation considered to be a failure by one might be considered a success by another, particularly in cases of direct competition or a zero-sum game. As well, the degree of success or failure in a situation may be differently viewed by distinct observers or participants, such that a situation that one considers to be a failure, another might consider to be a success, a qualified success or a neutral situation.
It may also be difficult or impossible to ascertain whether a situation meets criteria for failure or success due to ambiguous or ill-defined definition of those criteria. Finding useful and effective criteria, or heuristics, to judge the success or failure of a situation may itself be a significant task. If you fail, you suck. End of story.
Flavors of failure
Failure can be differentially perceived from the viewpoints of the evaluators. A person who is only interested in the final outcome of an activity would consider it to be an Outcome Failure if the core issue has not been resolved or a core need is not met. A failure can also be a process failure whereby although the activity is completed successfully, a person may still feel dissatisfied if the underlying process is perceived to be below expected standard or benchmark.
- Failure to anticipate
- Failure to perceive
Commercial failures
A commercial failure is a product that does not reach expectations of success, failing to come even close. A major flop goes one step further and is recognized for its complete lack of success.
Most of the items listed below had high expectations, significant financial investments, and/or widespread publicity, but fell far short of success. Due to the subjective nature of "success" and "meeting expectations", there can be disagreement about what constitutes a "major flop."
- For flops in computer and video gaming, see List of commercial failures in computer and video gaming
- For company failures related to the 1997–2001 Dot-com bubble, see Dot-com company.
- See also Vaporware
Other failures
- For military disasters, see List of military disasters
- For events that were highly anticipated but either did not happen or turned out to be disappointing, see Non-event
See also
- Cascading failure
- Debugging
- Failure analysis
- Failure rate
- Failure mode
- Murphy's law
- New product development
- Non-event
- Power outage
- Product
- Product management
- Single point of failure
- Structural failure
- Tensile strength
- White elephant
- System accident
References
- Charles Perrow, Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies, New Tork: Basic Books, 1983. Paperback reprint, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-691-00412-9
- Bush, George W, Miserable Failure: The Republican Party in the 21st Century, Dubya Press, 2007. ISBN 010010012
- Sandage, Scott A. Born Losers: A History of Failure in America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-674-01510-X, ISBN 0-674-02107-X
- Gay, Jared I. Enough Idle Chit-chat, Let's RPG!: An in-depth analysis of Toad's failures Some Place, Australia. ISBN 0-867-53090-X
External links
- Critical spare parts
- Failure magazine
- Great Failures of the Extremely Successful
- On Entreprenurial Failure
- Designing Building Failures
- Success with Failure, Comic strip featuring the ups and downs (mostly the latter) of IT consulting