| Revision as of 11:01, 30 October 2006 view sourceMajorly (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers38,677 editsm semi-protected← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:43, 10 November 2006 view source Glen (talk | contribs)Administrators27,228 edits →External links: emoved OUTRAGEOUSLY blatant spamNext edit → | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
| ==External links== | ==External links== | ||
| * | |||
| * | * | ||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | * | ||
| * , Comic strip featuring the ups and downs (mostly the latter) of IT consulting | * , Comic strip featuring the ups and downs (mostly the latter) of IT consulting | ||
Revision as of 03:43, 10 November 2006
 | Editing of this article by new or unregistered users is currently disabled. See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this article and you wish to make a change, you can submit an edit request, discuss changes on the talk page, request unprotection, log in, or create an account. |
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.
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.
Jared Diamond lists two reasons why a society can collapse:
- 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. Obviously, due to the subjective nature of "success" and "meeting expectations", there can be disagreement about what constitutes a "major flop."
- For a list of miscellaneous commercial product and service failures, see List of miscellaneous commercial failures.
- For flops in computer and video gaming, see List of commercial failures in computer and video gaming.
- For flops concerning groceries, see List of grocery marketing flops.
- For computer-related flops, see List of commercial failures in computer technology.
- For aviational commercial failures, see List of commercial failures in aviation.
- 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.
- For flops in entertainment, see List of flops in entertainment.
- For flops in sports, see List of sports flops.
References
- Lansdowne, Bridget L.M. BOOM, BUST, BANG!: A History of American Failures. Staskin Mellville-Organization Press, 2004. ISBN ?.
- Charles Perrow, Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies, New Tork: Basic Books, 1984. 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 067401510X, ISBN 067402107X.
See also
- Cascading failure
- Debugging
- Failure analysis
- Failure mode
- Failure rate
- Murphy's law
- New product development
- Non-event
- Power outage
- Product
- Product management
- Single point of failure
- Structural failure
- System accident
- Tensile strength
- White elephant
External links
- Failure magazine
- Designing Building Failures
- Success with Failure, Comic strip featuring the ups and downs (mostly the latter) of IT consulting