News
Failing sooner rather than later may be a blessing, says Dylan Suitor
- /home/u249204778/domains/spectator.com.gh/public_html/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 27
https://spectator.com.gh/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/IMG-20211013-WA0092.jpg&description=Failing sooner rather than later may be a blessing, says Dylan Suitor', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
- Share
- Tweet /home/u249204778/domains/spectator.com.gh/public_html/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 72
https://spectator.com.gh/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/IMG-20211013-WA0092.jpg&description=Failing sooner rather than later may be a blessing, says Dylan Suitor', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
There isn’t a single person, book, or algorithm in the world that can produce a surefire way to succeed in business. There are too many moving parts, too many things to consider, and too many ways everything could go wrong for anyone to suggest that there’s a business strategy that guarantees success.
There are, however, ways to approach the world of business that, even though they might seem counterintuitive, might help some people achieve success. Dylan Suitor, a realtor at the head of many real estate-related businesses, including Elevation Realty Network Inc. and Keller Williams Neighbourhood Realty, thinks that failing forward is the way to plow ahead.
Dylan learned this lesson early on. “I scaled my first real estate business, Dylan Suitor and Associates, through constantly failing forward,” he says. “The road was filled with one setback after another but overcoming them only served as fuel that kept me going forward.”
Why is this concept of growing through failure so important? For starters, it’s at the core of the idea of entrepreneurship. In the startup world, for example, it’s an accepted fact that the vast majority of startups won’t live past their first anniversary. Statistics agree, too. Does that stop people from becoming serial startup entrepreneurs? Of course not!
One of the reasons it’s possible to talk about failure and use the “forward” in conjunction with it is because every failure presents a teachable moment, or an opportunity to move in another direction. When failure is supposed to teach entrepreneurs something, it might almost be in their best interest to, as long as they are going to fail, do it as quickly as possible.
The ability to move quickly after failure was what brought Dylan some of his initial success and led to the companies he has today. But the most interesting thing about this mentality is that it’s easily found in the biggest setback and the biggest accomplishments. A story of acquisition and renovation that reads like an epic battle between Dylan’s company and a 32-unit building that Dylan Suitor was losing most of the time turned into one of his biggest successes.
That’s why failing forward is so valuable; it lets entrepreneurs, or anyone willing to try it out, reframe their losses and move on strengthened by the experience. Does it mean that people should haphazardly enter into situations where the possibility for dire consequences is real? Of course not. But in the world of business, everything that prevents a person from taking risks is preventing them from growing; it’s as simple as that.
A mentality that says how a fall might get people further ahead than they were when they were standing is extremely valuable, not in the least because everyone is going to experience that failure eventually. It could be said that people who manage to fail and live to say that they’ve failed forward are the lucky ones, rather than the people whose only failure was to try.
The Director of Legal Affairs of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Gary Nimako Marfo, has questioned who will bear the cost of conducting presidential and parliamentary primaries following the Supreme Court’s ruling on the party’s delegate system.
Speaking to journalists, Mr. Nimako Marfo said he would not immediately comment on the ruling, adding that he wanted to wait for the full details before sharing his views.
“I don’t want to comment on it now. Let’s wait,” he said.
When asked about the Supreme Court’s decision that all members in good standing should vote in party elections, he shifted attention to the financial implications of implementing the ruling.
According to him, allowing all members in good standing to vote would increase the cost of organising internal party elections.
He questioned who would pay for the expanded electoral process.
“Who is going to pay for the cost of the elections?” he asked.
When a journalist suggested that political parties would bear the cost, Mr. Nimako Marfo replied, “Let’s wait and see.”
The comments come after the Supreme Court ruled that political parties should allow all members in good standing to vote in their internal elections, a decision that is expected to expand participation but also increase the financial and logistical demands of organising presidential and parliamentary primaries.
By: Jacob Aggrey
The Supreme Court of Ghana has declared the delegate system used by political parties to elect presidential and parliamentary candidates unconstitutional.
In a 5-2 majority decision delivered, the Court ruled that the long-standing system violates democratic principles and ordered all political parties to ensure every registered, card-bearing member participates in presidential and parliamentary primaries.
The ruling brings to an end decades of internal party elections conducted by a limited number of delegates.
The suit was filed by former Minister for Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation, Professor Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng; veteran politician Dr. Nyaho Nyaho-Tamakloe; and former Minister for Lands and Forestry, Dr. Christine Amoako-Nuamah.
The plaintiffs argued that the delegate system created inequality among party members by granting voting rights to a privileged minority while excluding ordinary members in good standing.
They told the Court that restricting voting rights to delegates was inconsistent with the democratic principles enshrined in the 1992 Constitution.
The Attorney-General’s Department supported the suit and urged the Court to adopt a “one member, one vote” approach.
In its submission, the State argued that political parties perform an important public function in Ghana’s democratic framework and that their internal electoral processes must reflect constitutional values of equality, participation and universal suffrage.
The Attorney-General further submitted that expanding voting rights to all registered members would strengthen accountability and deepen internal democracy within political parties.
The judgment means that going forward, presidential and parliamentary candidates will be selected by all registered members of a political party, instead of by delegates alone.
Political parties are expected to review their constitutions and structures to comply with the Court’s directive ahead of the 2028 general elections.
By Edem Mensah-Tsotorme
