If an idea has failed in the past, is it likely to fail again or not?
Put in another way, what determines whether a previously failed idea could succeed in a different time, context, or execution?
History is filled with concepts that initially faltered but later flourished under different circumstances.
In theory, I think the more we learn from both our own mistakes and those documented in history, the less likely we are to repeat them.
In principle, learning from failure is important, however, blindly dismissing an idea solely because it failed before could cause us to miss valuable opportunities.
There's this pattern of 'premature innovation' that repeats throughout history.
And observing it in a bit detailed way reveals how cultural context shapes an idea's success as much as its technical merit, if not more.
Take the rise and fall(and rise again) of electric vehicles. Electric cars actually predated gasoline-powered ones in the early 1900s, offering a quieter, cleaner driving experience.
But they didn't catch up and faded into obscurity. Part of the reason being gasoline became cheap and abundant, and the infrastructure for fuel stations expanded.
Today, with different environmental concerns, electric vehicles are experiencing a renaissance. Why? It's not because the core concept has changed, but the world around it did.
The core of the matter is that grasping the distinction between fundamental flaws and circumstantial limitations is crucial for any innovator or thinker.
Arguably, timing and context tend to matter more than originality as can be supported by many of today's most successful ventures.
Google wasn't the first search engine, Facebook wasn't the first social network, and the iPhone wasn't the first smartphone.
These ventures weren't first to market but the first to arrive when conditions were right.
Experts Aren't Always Knowledgeable
I can't help but segue a bit into investing. I think as an investor, having this skill is equally valuable.
Modern investors face an unprecedented volume of investment opportunities, many of them wrapped in compelling narratives.
Some like blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies, can be truly transformative ideas waiting for their moment or have already proven themselves to be viable.
The tip is to apply the same analytical framework we touched on earlier. Is an investment opportunity failing because the core concept is flawed, or because the supporting ecosystem isn't yet mature?
Are current limitations technological, regulatory, or even cultural. And are these limitations likely to change over time?
The "experts" who dismissed electric cars or cryptocurrency in their early days were arguably too focused on present limitations instead of future possibilities.
Don't take what others say too seriously. Don't be dumbstruck by what experts say. And don't be afraid to trust in your own common sense.
If an idea doesn't sit right with you, try to explore why that is. What is it about the idea or its timing that makes you hesitate?
The answer may well reveal if you're seeing a fundamental flaw or recognizing that the moment isn't quite right, yet.
Thanks for reading!! Share your thoughts below on the comments.
