It depends on your audience. If they are a general audience wanting to be entertained, then your negative results can be presented as obstacles on the road to enlightenment. They are part of the hero's journey, illustrating the difficulties you had to overcome. Depicting these setbacks as frustrating and seemingly insuperable makes your final triumph all the more compelling and validates your character and intelligence to the audience. This of course assumes you have some positive results to share, thus making a good story.
If on the other hand, you are presenting to a group of colleagues trying to collectively solve a problem, you first have to assess the dynamics of your team. Most biotechs and pharmas, and all academic departments operate on the star system. That is, rewards are handed out to those who appear to unfailingly successful. If this is the case, you need to tell the hero's story, as per above.
If your team is actually focused on solving problems, rather than establishing a hierarchy of perceived merit, then presenting negative results is one of the most important and valuable things you can do. Most ideas are flawed, and fail; only a few are genuinely good. High-functioning teams try many ideas, and eliminate the failures as quickly as possible, so that they can focus on the ideas that really have a chance to succeed. Presentation of negative results is absolutely critical for this fail-fast model to function. This in turn requires group leaders who can distinguish process from results - that is, who can distinguish a negative result that proceeds from poor effort from a negative result that proceeds from a flawed underlying hypothesis. Since the group leaders usually determine which hypotheses to test, it is difficult for them to admit that the effort was good but that the premise was flawed. Count yourself lucky if you have such a leader, and try to become one yourself.
No comments:
Post a Comment