in the know
How Well Do You Fail?
Cynthia Cheng Correia, Principal,
Knowledge inForm
“No, they’re not failures. They taught something that
I didn’t know. They taught me what direction to
move in.”
Thomas Edison
How often do you succeed in your competitive
intelligence efforts? How often do you fail? Do you
tacitly keep track? Perhaps you formally measure your
successes and failures (hits and misses) as a part of your
performance. When considering your intelligence failures
what do you do with them?
Compared to most business activities, failure in
competitive intelligence seems to carry with it a deeper
stigma. After all, the crack CI professional is expert in
intelligence and should “get it right” most or all of the
time. Unlike “just” research, we put the weight of our
analytical skills and experience into what we do. We have
a stable of tools and methods that help us achieve insights
and foresights. We’re supposed to see what our colleagues
don’t see and help them act on it.
These expectations often create an environment in
which intelligence failure is a taboo topic: it’s to be avoided
not only in our performance, but it’s also a subject we tend
to avoid contemplating. We should be self-assured in order
to maintain our clients’ confidence in our contributions.
Expressing concerns or doubt can undermine our
intelligence credibility. Discussing failure will only bring
more attention to it…and to us. Thus, we focus on our
successes; but failure can tell us much about where we are
and what we’re doing (or not doing).
DEVELOP COMFORT WITH FAILURE
While thinking positively and confidently about
our abilities and deliverables can help us build trust with
our users, understanding when and how we fail can help
increase the likelihood of our future successes and gain
greater trust from our clients and team members. The key
Volume 14 • Number 4 • October/December 2011 www.scip.org
to this is to create intelligent failures by understanding
why they (or even minor “misses”) occurred, developing
an understanding with our users about the nature of
intelligence, and incorporating our failures into our
learning processes.
As we confront failure and embrace the inherent
exposure and risks in conducting intelligence, we may
find surprising outcomes. One of my favorite lessons in
this comes from an experience SCIP Fellow Cliff Kalb
recounts: On a Friday morning before his vacation, Cliff
and his team had seen reports in the business press of a
possible merger between two competitors. In order to
prompt and support executive action, the team produced
and submitted by that afternoon a merger and market
share analysis for the combined entity. While on vacation,
Cliff saw that he and his team had missed the mark: a
different competitor was the actual acquirer.
Upon returning to the office after his vacation (and
not expecting to remain in his job much longer), Cliff
coincidently rode the elevator with the CEO. Ready to
face the music, he apologized for the intelligence lapse.
The CEO stopped the elevator and said, “You sent me
analysis that advised that [X company] was a takeover
candidate. We were advised in advance, but we chose not
to counter-bid. We were warned – thank you.”
Cliff ’s initial perception of his performance differed
wildly from his client’s. What he perceived as failure was
valuable intelligence in the eyes of his CEO. While clearly
his CEO was a knowledgeable intelligence user and had
a realistic perspective of competitive intelligence, Cliff ’s
perceived success/failure and their consequences as an
all or nothing proposition. He counts among his good
fortune that this lesson occurred early in his intelligence
career. Consequently, he hasn’t since harbored a fear of
failure – and has actually embraced it – which has likely
contributed to his successes.
Not many of us will experience this type of profound
and early lesson, so how do we develop our own comfort
with failure and harness its power towards our successes?
51
in the know
First, we need to break the taboo of failure, beginning
with ourselves and our team. In Cliff ’s case, the taboo
was broken when he encountered his CEO, who helped
him gain a more balanced perspective of the role of
intelligence. While we may not have such experienced and
realistic users, we can remind ourselves what intelligence
is reasonably intended to achieve, be well prepared for
conducting intelligence, and help our users develop
realistic expectations for it.
DIFFERENT TYPES OF FAILURE
Primed to begin embracing failure intelligently, we can
then embark on detecting and understanding our failures
by recognizing that there are different types of competitive
intelligence failures: failures in practice, blindspots
and failures of perception, and ethical failures. When
examining failures, understanding the nature of the failure
helps us identify ways in which we can address and avoid
them. Each type of failure carries with it different causes,
risks, and prescriptions.
Failures in practice
Failures in practice can involve a variety of missteps
such as possessing inadequate intelligence skills and
techniques, misapplying tools and techniques, and making
errors in judgment. These types of failures are the classic
“getting it wrong” mistakes. Resolving failures in practice
typically require developing intelligence competencies
through training or hiring; outsourcing to fill skills,
experience, or research gaps; and enhancing team learning
(including double-loop learning).
Blindspots and failures of perception
Blindspots and failures of perception develop from
a range of sources – from harboring invalid assumptions
(including corporate myths and taboos), hubris, engaging
in escalating commitment, and applying constrained
perspectives. This type of failure can affect even highly
skilled and experienced intelligence professionals and
executives. These types of failures are often associated with
management surprises.
Failures of perception are often more deeply-rooted
and systemic. Failure at the team-level can be dealt with
more easily by:
52 www.scip.org Competitive Intelligence
• challenging perceptions through internal exercises
• employing more rigorous frameworks for developing
KIT/KIQs, hypotheses, and analysis
• bringing in external perspectives
Failure at the organization level also requires the
recognition and commitment of top managers, as well as
widespread effort throughout the organization.
Ethical failures
Ethical failures can result from an inadequate
understanding of proper conduct, a misalignment between
personal or group ethics and widely accepted practices, or
rationalization, often under pressure. This type of failure
is associated with legal exposure or bad publicity for the
organization.
Ethical failures can range from individual to group-
level, with the former being the easier to address, given
their isolated nature. Solutions include training, the
establishment of clear policies and guidelines, outlining
clear procedures, maintaining dialogue on ethical questions
and concerns, and given the nature of the breach, dismissal
of the violators.
HIERARCHY OF FAILURE
When we address failure, we also need to view it along
three hierarchical levels: individual, team/group, and
organization. These three dimensions provide the basis for
our learning processes. As we consider our failure along
these levels, we must consider several aspects.
How extensive is the reach of this failure?
The purpose here is not to assign blame, but to
determine the scope of the issue and the level of impact
that the failure has. Is the failure contained within an
intelligence role or function, like analysis? Is this a team-
wide issue? From here, we begin to explore solutions and
implement learning processes and systems along each of
these levels.
Where should – and can – the solutions reside
and where/how can the intelligence practitioner effect
improvements?

With individual failures (such as a researcher
overlooking a key piece of intelligence), the solution and
lessons tend to be straightforward, like developing the
ability to identify signals, enhancing research skills, or
employing a procedural checklist, for instance. In the
event of an organizational lapse (for example, based on a
corporate myth), it’s beyond the power of the intelligence
manager to single-handedly address this across the
organization, particular when organizational politics is
involved. However, the manager can effect change in
perspectives and approaches at the individual and team
levels, and perhaps among top management and colleagues
over time.
FAILURE POST-MORTEM
As we begin to learn from our failures, it’s often
convenient – and effective – to examine our intelligence
process and related systems, like an enterprise knowledge
management system. A common technique is the
postmortem or project debriefing. Initially, after an
intelligence failure, this will be the most important
learning step, as the intelligence manager reviews with
team members and collaborators the project and its
context, draws lessons, and identifies solutions that will be
implemented in future intelligence efforts.
In addition to common practical challenges such
as the need to find more timely published sources,
it’s beneficial to pay attention to possible process and
perspective-related issues that may affect the success of
your products:
• Are you spending too much time on research and not
analysis?
• Are you repeatedly missing important developments
that occur over the course of the project cycle?
• Did you and your users make false assumptions (were
you caught by surprise, despite thorough research and
analysis)?
Questions like these are key to examining your failures
beyond techniques and beyond face-value.
While postmortems are easier to conduct on projects
that have a defined endpoint or that have results that may
be seen and measured immediately, for ongoing or long-
term efforts, it’s possible to apply smaller scale versions of
them at project checkpoints, usually at the end of phases
Volume 14 • Number 4 • October/December 2011 www.scip.org
in the know
or at time intervals. For projects that won’t see results
tested for some time, managers can build checkpoints
into a project review schedule that may be a part of your
organization’s key intelligence topics (KITs) definition
process.
As you begin to modify your intelligence practice and
process through these lessons, be sure to include colleagues
who have insights and will be affected by these changes.
Elicit their perspectives, suggestions, and feedback.
Codify changes in process or procedural models, and
communicate your lessons and changes to your intelligence
contributors and partners. Test and review your changes to
be sure that they are addressing the issues effectively.
THE UNIQUE ENVIRONMENT OF FAILURES
Failure – and learning from it – can be a
multidimensional and complex issue, and each
environment is unique. As managers, our challenge is to
find the combination of solutions that can address the
factors contributing to failure and to effect change that can
take hold at the individual, team, or organizational levels.
Here are some recommendations.
Understand Failure
This requires self-awareness and reflection on specific
instances, as well as identifying possible patterns in your
failures. Enhance your own understanding by familiarizing
yourself with perspectives about failure and methods to
address it. (The April 2011 issue of the Harvard Business
Review focuses on this topic.)
Understand Your Aims
What do you want to achieve by understanding
your failures? Do you want to minimize or avoid future
occurrences of a specific type of failure? Fortify your team?
Build greater trust among team members or with users? By
understanding what you want to achieve, you can begin to
design your approach to learning and developing.
Frame the Issue Constructively
The subject of failure is a hard one to embrace
for most people, especially publicly. Few people are
comfortable highlighting their errors. Frame them in a
learning context, establish ground rules for discussion (e.g.
“Blame-Free Zone”), attach positive remedies and actions,
and share responsibility for building positive outcomes.
53
in the know
Address Concerns
Despite your good intentions, careful preparation and
communication, and your assurances, participants and
collaborators in your efforts to embrace and learn from
failure will likely have concerns about your initiative. Fear
of exposure, undermining the confidence of stakeholders,
and simply taking a hard look at oneself or ones colleague
can present serious barriers to this effort.
It is vital to create an environment of trust by listening
to and addressing concerns of your team and contributors.
It also helps to lead by example and give your colleagues
time to understand, observe, and embrace the process.
Find Inspiration
From Steve Jobs to Thomas Edison to Walt Disney,
history is rich with notable leaders who transformed and
transcended their failures toward great success. Share these
examples and link them to your team’s experiences.
Find Champions
As with many aspects of intelligence management,
it’s easier and more effective when you have the support
of key and respected champions behind (or even ahead
of ) you. They can also help you understand the political
dimensions of embracing failure. Cultivate them, make
your case, listen to them, and make your champions
known.
Lead and Engage Colleagues
Thoughtful methods that involve active and visible
participation like the “Failure Wall,” the brainchild of
Dunn & Bradstreet Credibility Corp. CEO Jeff Stibel, can
help shift corporate (or team) culture from one that fears
54 www.scip.org Competitive Intelligence
failure to one that embraces and learns from it. Ongoing
exercises help establish positive new habits and maintain
the necessary momentum to make your initiative “stick.”
Failure in organizations is inevitable. As Cliff Kalb
sees it, “If, at the end of the day, the recommendations you
provide are successful 50% of the time, then you’re doing
well.” We can fail intelligently by harnessing failure for
organizational learning and to enhance our competitive
intelligence practices, or we can hope all’s well that ends
well.
How well do you fail? How do you and your team use
failure in your work? Do you employ intelligent failure?
Let’s hear your thoughts on the SCIP LinkedIn Group.
Cynthia Cheng Correia is Principal of Knowledge inForm,
a consulting and training firm specializing in competitive
intelligence and knowledge/information management for CI.
Cynthia teaches and advises on CI and KM at Simmons
College and California State University, Northridge. She is co-
Chair of the SCIP Boston Chapter, SCIP 2011 Catalyst Award
recipient, and was the founding Editor of Intelligence Insights.
She can be reached at ccc2@knowledgeinform.com.