Topic 2: Bad Failure vs Good Failure

As discussed earlier, failure could be the trigger for engaging in a learning process, which affects both personal and professional spheres. However, it is not taken for granted that failure will bring positive learning experiences. Such a complex topic affects every individual differently and may not result in a positive consequence. On the contrary, it could even develop in more problematic situations. Relevant literature in general has tended to neglect the negative aspects of failure, remaining focused on the positive side (Olaison & Sørensen, 2014). It is possible, then, to differentiate between ‘fraud’ (negative failure) and fiasco (positive failure) (Olaison & Sørensen, 2014); in other words, Bad Failure vs Good Failure.

Bad Failure refers to a type of failure in which the individual rejects any sort of blame, responsibility, or acceptance of the failure. Neglecting failure is a common trait, and it is very much related to the reflective phase of learning. Thus, it merely depends on the person. For that reason, it is important to be aware of this, to try to avoid it. During the reflective phase, the individual will find themselves in a dilemma, facing the question of ‘whom to blame’ – the ‘attribution’. Attribution could be internal or external (Lattacher & Wdowiak, 2020). Assuming an internal attribution means the individual considers that failure has been brought about due to their own actions. This attribution is more likely lead the individual to a positive learning experience (the individual will be more likely to engage in the abstract conceptualisation and active implementation phases, completing the learning experience). Yet, overfocusing on self-blame could stop the individual from advancing, locking themselves in the personal sphere of the abstract conceptualisation phase, and therefore, to prematurely exit the market.

On the other hand, assuming an external attribution means that the individual blames external factors, either physical elements (venture, other individuals), abstract elements (bad luck, Destiny etc.), or narcissism. Therefore, the individual does not engage in the reflection phase, thus avoiding the possibility of thinking about the real causes of their failure. If the individual does not consider internal causes, it is more probable to directly jump to the active implementation phase, committing to a new entrepreneurial re-engagement in which the same mistakes would happen again, since the individual has not reflected on them.

Thus, obtaining a positive outcome from the learning process heavily depends on maintaining a balance between external and internal attribution. Not all experiences end up in effective learning (Zhou & Tang, 2020).