|
Failure is (not) an option (?) Vol. I, No. 04 * 15 November 2008  By JCI A / Mem. CERWIN T. EVIOTA, CNT, NG 2006 Charter President “FAILURE is not an option.” So goes the famous line NASA flight director Eugene “Gene” F. Kranz uttered to flight controllers at Mission Control in Houston on April 13, 1970 after declaring: “We've never lost an American in space and we're sure as hell not gonna lose one on my watch!” Actor Ed Harris said it well when he played the role of the person, who brought Neil Armstrong to the moon and saved the crew of Apollo 13, in the 1995 movie. The line is typically American, truly western and very results-oriented.
Western outlook  A year before the US had directly plunged into the Vietnam War, General Paul D. Harkins (left), the commander of U.S. forces in South Vietnam, confidently predicted victory by Christmas 1963 if the US would shift from defensive mode to offensive involvement.
General William C. Westmoreland (right), who succeeded Harkins and eventually commanded the US forces that turned offensive in Vietnam by 1964, declared: “"I am convinced that U.S. troops with their energy, mobility, and firepower can successfully take the fight to the NLF [National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam]” and the Democratic Republic of (North) Vietnam.
 Phase 1 of his 3-phase offensive plan declared the “commitment of U.S. (and other free world) forces necessary to halt the losing trend by the end of 1965. Such was indeed a typical Western line, results-oriented, even time-bound.
Yet, he had to eventually get to Phase 3 that stated: “If the enemy persisted, a period of 12 to 18 months following Phase 2 will be required for the final destruction of enemy forces remaining in remote base areas.”  Partly to boost the sagging popularity of President Lyndon B. Johnson (right) who appointed him Army Chief-of-Staff by 1968 in what was more of a PR stint, Westmoreland again predicted victory by Christmas of 1967. (Three months after I was born! c",)
But was it achieved? Oriental paradigm  Meanwhile, General Van Tien Dung (left, in younger years), chief of staff of the People’s Army of Vietnam (PAVN), told selected foreign journalists, who interviewed him while Westmoreland’s 3-phase plan was in progress, that his forces would win the war.
When asked by when, he would only say: “I don’t know. But we will win the war.” True to his Oriental frame of mind, Gen. Van won some battles one after the other, especially when he commanded the Tri-Thien-Hue Front and executed the Nguyen Hue Offensive of 1972 (called the Easter Offensive in the West) that was a faiure.  He succeeded his superior, General Vo Nguyen Giap (right), as commander-in-chief by 1974 when the Vietnam War evolved from a guerrilla struggle to more conventional forms. He planned and commanded the Ho Chi Minh Campaign, the final PAVN offensive that collapsed South Vietnamese defenses and captured Saigon in 1975.
The results-oriented predicted victories but lost the war. The underdog but process-oriented emerged victorious. Failures Both sides of the war have had failures, lots of them, in fact. While the West was driven more by “producing results,” it had so much pride to protect after the successful campaigns in World War II and the Korean War.   Humiliated by Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev (left, left photo), US was forced to leave Fidel Castro (right, left photo) alone after the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
Then came the rise to power in USSR by October 1964 of hardliner Leonid Brezhnev (right) that fueled more the running cold war with the West. On the other hand, with their pride pushed to the wall by the interfering Americans, the PAVN just “learned through the process” of one failure after the other but with the end of driving the US away and eventually gaining self-rule in mind. Learning from all their mistakes, General Van eventually had the Ho Chi Minh campaign as his final thesis. History tells what that gained for Vietnam today. JCI on Failures Ironic it may seem that JCI may have originated from the West, its ways are Oriental. We are a process-oriented organization. Being so, we allow members to commit mistakes as they get their hands on projects. It is our way of doing things to ensure that members get to learn from mistakes and failures. I should stress that failure is not an option. We just have to allow it. Learning from mistakes is essential in learning-by-doing. We should not deny the members from experiencing mistakes and failures for these provide them the needed contrast to anticipate what will happen and be proactive with the circumstances in the succeeding things they do. We fall, even many times. But no big deal. Falling down does not make you a failure. Staying down does. Rising from failures builds confidence, brings efficiency at work and makes one more effective in making things happen the next time. Yes, we commit mistakes. But we should not commit the same mistakes again. It is sad that many leaders in some chapters, especially the President, “save” projects from failing. Many would even dip their hands in their wallet to spend (read: pay) for projects to succeed. No wonder that in many chapters their members get scared to be president. “It is so expensive. You get to spend a lot as president,” they would say. A friend proudly told us their past presidents are their court of last resort. They intervene when circumstances indicate a project is doomed to fail.
Why, is the “result” more important? For non-JCI organizations, yes. But we are a mill for entrepreneurial leaders. The “process” is essential. Let us not deny that experience to the members. Let them see the contrast so they may learn. The reason our S.A.P.A.E. process in project management ends in “E” is precisely why we must expose members to the rudiments of leadership, even down to bare bones. And that includes failure. Successful failure  On my watch as Charter President in 2006, we also had what NASA’s Gene Kranz described as a “successful failure” on the safe return of Astronauts Jim Lovel, Fred Haise and John Swigert on the ill-fated Apollo 13 mission.
Our “Fiesta sa Sinulog” in January 2006 created impact for us. A mix of trade fair and entertainment, most of the slots offered were filled with renting entrepreneurs.  The three nights of entertainment were fully packed bringing awesome sales to the food strip. JCI and political leaders graced the ceremonies and the fair itself.
The JCI brand was a big star, truly a success was that project in terms of JCI 3M. But the project failed for its purpose: to raise funds for the new chapter. On how and why, let's leave that as an internal matter ... c",) Worth the time You would wonder why the “little guys” of JCI Cebu-Mactan Channel are so passionate with what we do? This is our secret. We find time and have fun in our projects and activities. We chuckle but learn from our mistakes. This is the discipline we (who founded this chapter) had inculcated in our charter members. We are glad the leaders today continue with that approach, even with more passion. They take opportunities from nowhere that come in the way after some preliminary S.A. (in S.A.P.A.E.). But I just feel sad that leaders of a chapter who were shared the opportunity did not welcome the idea with excitement. “We’ll see if we have time for that,” was the spontaneous reply. They apparently fear failure.
 If only they realize that JCI projects are worth the time for the learnings one would gain -- for free.
I hope they will appreciate that failure is not an option. We just allow it. As what can be a metaphor for JCI in a going Nido TV commercial goes: "I got dirty. I got stinky. But see, I learned!"
|
Incredible!
hi if you see geno gonzales please a...
Our colleagues are also extending the...
Dear JCI Sen. Reggie Yu, We appreci...
You're right, ITF Reggie. I hope just...