| Revision as of 18:49, 26 May 2008 view source88.112.111.232 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:49, 26 May 2008 view source 88.112.111.232 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| '''Failure''' ('''fail''', '''phail''' or '''flop''') in general refers to the state or ] of not meeting a desirable or intended objective. It may be viewed as the opposite of ]. Product failure ranges from failure to sell the product to ] of the product, in the worst cases leading to personal injury, the province of ]. | '''Failure''' ('''fail''', '''phail''' or '''flop''') in general refers to the state or ] of not meeting a desirable or intended objective. It may be viewed as the opposite of ]. Product failure ranges from failure to sell the product to ] of the product, in the worst cases leading to personal injury, the province of ]. | ||
| Finnish ISP has FAILED! | Finnish ISP elisa has FAILED! | ||
| == Criteria for failure == | == Criteria for failure == | ||
Revision as of 18:49, 26 May 2008
For other uses, see Failure (disambiguation).
Failure (fail, phail 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. Product failure ranges from failure to sell the product to fracture of the product, in the worst cases leading to personal injury, the province of forensic engineering.
Finnish ISP elisa has FAILED!
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.
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
Fail internet meme
FAIL is a popular internet meme where users superimpose the word FAIL on embarrassing or compromising photos. G4 has a web feature called "Epic Fail" that denotes major gaffs in popular culture - a mainstream play on the meme. Fail Dogs, an animal version, made the front page of Digg in February, 2008.
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
- Forensic engineering
- 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
- http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1306942/memes_help_keep_internet_interesting/index.html
- The Fail Blog
- FailDogs.com
- G4: The Feed
- Made Popular
- 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
- 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