Groups never admit failure (nav.al)

Article summary

The article discusses how groups tend to never admit failure, instead opting to maintain a mythology of success or repression. This is because admitting failure can lead to a schism or the dissolution of the group. The author notes that individuals are more likely to admit failure than groups, and that for-profit entities are more sustainable than non-profit ones because they are forced to take feedback from reality. The author argues that the best way to change the world is through for-profit, sustainable, and ethical businesses.

Main themes

• group dynamics
• admitting failure
• sustainability
• non-profit vs for-profit
• organizational inefficiency
• bureaucracy

What commenters say

• Groups have a tendency to prioritize their own survival over their original objectives, leading to inefficiency and stagnation.
• Admitting failure is often seen as a sign of weakness, and can lead to a loss of morale and cohesion within a group.
• Some argue that the problem of groups never admitting failure is not unique to non-profits, but can be observed in all large organizations.
• Others propose that the key to success lies in finding a balance between certainty and observation, allowing for adaptability and growth.
• It is suggested that the emphasis on presenting a perfect image can be detrimental, as it can lead to a lack of honest evaluation and improvement.
• The idea that attackers always lose more people in war is disputed, with some arguing that it is a myth and that morale is a more important factor.
• The concept of Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy is mentioned, which states that in any bureaucracy, those dedicated to the organization itself will eventually gain control over those dedicated to the organization's goals.
• There are examples of organizations that have successfully adapted to changing circumstances, such as the March of Dimes, which shifted its focus from polio to premature infants after the development of the polio vaccine.