Success vs failure - Essay Example

Success vs Failure Question As d in the article of Nobel, a small failure can easily become a major one if the funding supporting the relevantplan is significant (Nobel 1). Indeed, providing extensive funding for plans that have not been tested in advance as of their feasibility and their risks can result to severe losses. Therefore, funds can breed failure in the following way: when a plan fails its continuation is set under discussion; usually, the termination of such plan is decided. However, if the funding available for the realization of this plan is high then a CEO may decide to order the continuation of the plan, a fact that usually results to the increase of the losses.

In addition, as long as the funding of a problematic plan is in progress the weaknesses of the plan are not revealed. For this reason, Nobel notes that extensive funding can ‘hide all mistakes’ (Nobel 1), transforming a small failure to a major one; the latter can be quite difficult to be managed. Question 2 One of the most common causes of failure is the lack of careful review of a plan’s basis. Setting the targets of a plan but not reviewing its aspects, as of their feasibility and implications can increase the chances for a failure; in fact, such cases are common in start up companies where valuable time can be lost before the founders of the company realize that ‘the plan is based on a problematic basis’ (Nobel 1).

However, failure can occur even if a plan is well structured and carefully monitored. Indeed, in order for a plan to success it is necessary for time to exist for covering any gaps of the plan. In the article of Nobel the value of timing, as related to business plans is explained as follows: it is quite difficult for a business plan to be quite successful in the first place. Usually, a firm needs to employ several business plans before identifying a successful business plan (Nobel 1). Two quite successful firms, Netscape and Open Market, have used this practice in order to identify a business plan that would suit best to their needs (Nobel 1).

According to the above, an entrepreneur could take a series of measures for mitigating failure and ensure success: a) first, he should carefully review the basis of the business plan, whether it is feasible and appropriately structured; emphasis should be given on the flexibility of the plan since changes could be required during the implementation process; b) at the next level, the entrepreneur should develop alternative business plans, i.e. plans that could replace the initial business plan in case that the latter would be proved problematic; c) finally, the entrepreneur should keep the funding of the plan at low levels, avoiding the risk for a major failure instead of a small one, in the context described in the first question.

Question 3 When referring to business plans, success could be equally treacherous as failure. For example, if an entrepreneur would not have to face organizational failure, meaning that his plan in regard to a specific business would be fully successful then the following risk would exist: the entrepreneur could decide to increase the funding of the particular plan. If this plan is led to a failure after the investment on it of additional funds, then the failure can be extensive. In addition, without having any experience on organizational failures, the entrepreneur would be unable to manage failure in a later phase of a business plan, when huge funds have been already lost.

From this point of view, it would be preferable for an entrepreneur to face organizational failures, as many as possible, before being engaged in business plans supported by huge funds. Nobel refers to the case of ‘Steve Jobs and Henry Ford’ (Nobel 1) who had experienced the failure of many of their plans, a fact that helped them ‘to reach success’ (Nobel 2). Question 4 Personal failure can highly differ from organizational failure. Organizational failure can have the following forms: a) it can reflect the loss of the whole amount of money invested in a particular organization (Nobel 1); b) it can refer to the inability of an organization to secure for its investors the ‘projected return on investment’ (Nobel 1) and c) it may shows the inability to achieve a projected target (Nobel 1).

In all its modes, as described above, failure is considered as a common phenomenon in modern market (Nobel 1). On the other hand, personal failure is commonly related to ‘the violation of a fiduciary duty/ morals or the commitment of a crime’ (Nobel 2). Nobel refers to the following example of personal failure: the practice of giving to the stakeholders false information in regard to the organization’s financial status (Nobel 2). Organizational failure can become personal failure in certain cases.

For example a CEO may not inform investors on the financial losses of the organization so that the position of the organization towards its competitors is not threatened (Nobel 2). An entrepreneur could bounce back from organizational failure if he would take certain measures, as suggested in Question 2, for mitigating failure. It would be impossible for an entrepreneur to avoid organizational failure, but he should rather try to learn from that. On the other hand, an entrepreneur could bounce back from personal failure if he would respect morals and if he should not try to keep organizational failure secret; such an effort would lead him to violate the law and the rules of fair play (Nobel 2).

Using organizational failure for improving himself could help an entrepreneur to avoid personal failure, which could even destroy his career (Nobel 2). Works Cited Nobel, Carmen. “Why Companies Fail and How Their Founders Can Bounce Back” Harvard Business School, 2011, 1-2.