A Test That Doesn’t Work Out Is Information, Not a Failure

Like many coaches, I often invite clients to overcome the fear of the unknown by experimenting.

As a scientist, the idea to run experiments and collect data is at the core of everything I do. You plan an experiment to test one idea, collect and objectively analyse data to evaluate the validity of the idea. And here comes the important part: if the data do not confirm your idea, this is not a failure. Instead, it’s important information that indicates what you need to do to run a better experiment. This is frequently overlooked, but science must inevitably fail to achieve discovery.

The application of this concept beyond a scientific setting can be very powerful.

Most of my clients are going through major life or professional transition and are considering starting over, abandoning old paths for new ones. If you have been there, you know how daunting this can feel (I have been there myself). The fear of making a wrong move is paralyzing. The fear of regret can hold you in endless circles of what-if loops.

Last week, a client contemplating a professional pivot mentioned that whenever she tried to focus on the action steps for her career move, her energy and motivation would drop and she couldn’t accomplish anything. She was blaming herself for her inability to focus.

But during our conversation, as she was weighing a potential next step, she asked: “What if it doesn’t work?”

I told her, “If it doesn’t work, it’s not a failure. It’s information“

This completely changed her narrative. Her struggle was not a concentration issue; it was her fears blocking her progress. The moment she gave herself permission to fail, she realized the true informative power that failure carries, and she started to move forward. When we reframe failure as data rather than judgment, the pressure to make a flawless move disappears and progress begins to unfold.

The science of productive failure

The importance of experimenting in client or patient work is largely based on Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), where the therapist and the patient identify the patient’s negative prediction or belief and collaboratively design an experiment to challenge its validity. Scientific evidence clearly shows that the effects of this experiential approach can be stronger than challenging people’s beliefs using verbal techniques, such as exposing people to logical flaws in their thought process.

The importance of experimenting is also illustrated by neuroscientific research.

Our brain constantly generates prediction errors, meaning, the mismatch between predicted and actual outcomes. If, say, we expect something positive but something negative occurs (or vice versa), prediction errors update our expectations and internal models. This is a basic learning mechanism associated with increased adaptation in neurons and in our behaviours. This means that exposing ourselves to the risk of novel situations provides information for improving future decisions, reinforcing neural pathways that make us better prepared for future challenges.

In the field of pedagogy, Manu Kapur illustrated in a series of experiments how failure can actually be conducive to improvement. His research shows that students who are initially given vague, suboptimal instructions to solve a complex problem actually perform better on subsequent challenges than those who are given hints and guided toward the correct answers. Stumbling through the initial friction forced them to build deeper reasoning skills, proving that what looks like a failed attempt is often exactly what determines better, future decisions. Kapur named this concept productive failure.

Reframing the defeat

What this all tells us is simple. Failure is essential for growth, and this is true at the experiential, cognitive and neural level.

We see this exact mechanism play out in high performance. Interviewed after a bruising defeat at the 2025 Roland Garros, Jannik Sinner noted, “After tough losses I try to go through and then trying to understand what I can do better.” He was essentially describing a conscious update of his own prediction errors. By leaning into the data of that loss rather than treating it as a personal verdict, he went on to win Wimbledon just a few weeks later.

From stall to progress

To start applying this scientific neutrality to your own transition, you can begin with two simple shifts in perspective:

1. Shift from verdict to data collection

After a setback or a step that didn’t go as planned, your natural instinct might be to blame yourself or see it as proof that you shouldn’t have tried. Instead, try to look at it with the neutrality of a scientist. What specific information did that outcome give you?

2. Lower the stakes with micro-experiments

When a decision, or major change feels massive and permanent, the fear of regret can completely paralyze you. The antidote is to break that huge leap down into tiny, low-stakes tests. Treat your next few steps not as final decisions, but as quick experiments designed solely to gather information. If a micro-test doesn’t work out, you haven’t failed; you have simply narrowed down what doesn’t work for you.

Finding yourself stuck in a circle of overthinking?

Let’s discuss how working together could help you. Contact me or arrange a complimentary 60-minute consultation call.