What do you do if your program management approach is not embracing failure?

Failure is a strong word and suggests finality, however, it could also mean the exceeding of boundaries envisaged for time, cost, or quality of program outcome. In this sense, having governance and decision-making processes in place to quickly and proactively manage the inevitable risks and issues, is essential.

Embracing failure as a learning tool is crucial in program management. In my experience, programs that factor in failure as a learning opportunity tend to foster innovation and resilience. I've seen a program's culture transform when leadership openly discusses setbacks, not as defeats, but as stepping stones to success. This mindset shift can turn potential negative experiences into powerful lessons, ultimately strengthening the program's strategy and execution.

True that, the whole idea is to look out for continuous improvements, take the lesson learns from a failure & move on. Change is continuous, can come from many angles & impact the program. Fine tuning the methodology for delivery need to go ahead with the same flow to tackle the changes. At time failures will be inevitable, doesn’t stop us to embrace it, reflect, adjust & moving on.

Embracing failure in program management is crucial for growth. In my experience, when a program fails, conducting a thorough post-mortem analysis is key. This process uncovers the root causes of failure and provides actionable insights. By integrating these lessons into future plans, my teams have often turned setbacks into success stories. Moreover, acknowledging and sharing these failures transparently within the organization has helped to foster a more open and innovative culture, ultimately leading to stronger and more resilient programs.

“Gate reviews” in every stage delivery end, is a great way to review the progress of Work Package within a program. This should identify whether there has been any failures in the last stage delivery. The gate review will trigger the root cause analysis & corrective actions to move forward. The sponsor & governance team need to support the team on this journey to foster a resilient culture of continuous improvement.

Reviewing existing processes regularly is key to success. For example, when programs ramp up in activity, additional governance meetings may be required, or additional data-points produced for inclusion in program documentation. In respect of enterprise governance, such as directed by an Enterprise PMO, the min/max boundaries should be known so that individual program governance is right-sized. For example, smaller pieces of work should not need the same governance as a much larger program.

Embracing failure within program management is crucial for fostering innovation and continuous improvement. In my experience, adopting an agile and lean approach has been transformative. Iterative development allows for quick pivots in response to feedback, while lean principles focus on value creation by minimizing waste. This combination has proven effective in managing complex programs, as it builds resilience into the process, enabling teams to learn from setbacks and refine their strategies dynamically. Regularly measuring progress with key performance indicators ensures that learning from failure is data-driven and constructive.

Failure is an inherent possibility at any stage and phase of a program, marked by both "Known Unknowns" and "Unknown Unknowns" risks. The likelihood of encountering these risks decreases as a program progresses, underscoring the importance of mechanisms and methodologies that favor early detection and management of potential failures. A case in point is "Japan's First Private Satellite Explosion Seconds After Launch," illustrating that failures can occur unexpectedly, even in advanced stages. This incident underscores the critical need for identifying and addressing potential failures at the earliest possible stages.

Too many organisations are quick to move on from completed programs without thorough review of the journey, outcomes, successes and failures. This is a natural tendancy when resources are scarce and expensive, however, this should be tempered as far as possible given the benefits that can result from analysis and understanding of what went well and what didn't. For example, lessons learned logs are often not produced, and when they are, are often simply filed away with no proper review. Organisations benefit from senior stakeholder interest in post-program review, with actions assigned to investigate any negatives uncovered during the program journey.