{{Short description|Meeting or surpassing an intended goal or objective}} {{pp-pc|small=yes}} {{Other uses}} [[File:Fighting smallpox in Niger, 1969.jpg|thumb|A [[Niger]]ian man receives the [[smallpox vaccine]] in February 1969, as part of a global program that [[Smallpox#Eradication|successfully eradicated the disease]] from the human population.]] '''Success''' is the state or condition of meeting a [[Definition|defined]] range of [[Expectation (epistemic)|expectations]]. It may be viewed as the opposite of [[failure]]. The criteria for success depend on context, and may be relative to a particular observer or belief system. One person might consider a success what another person considers a failure, particularly in cases of direct [[competition]] or a [[Zero sum|zero-sum game]]. Similarly, the degree of success or failure in a situation may be differently viewed by distinct observers or participants, such that a situation that one considers to be a success, another might consider to be a failure, a qualified success or a neutral situation. For example, a film that is a commercial failure or even a [[box-office bomb]] can go on to receive a [[cult following]], with the initial lack of commercial success even lending a cachet of subcultural [[Cool (aesthetic)|coolness]].<ref>{{Cite book|last=Hunter|first=I. Q.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2H6hDAAAQBAJ&q=%22commercial+failure%22|title=Cult Film as a Guide to Life: Fandom, Adaptation, and Identity|date=2016-09-08|publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing USA|isbn=978-1-62356-897-9|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Mathijs|first1=Ernest|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rNi_DwAAQBAJ|title=The Routledge Companion to Cult Cinema|last2=Sexton|first2=Jamie|date=2019-11-22|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-317-36223-4|language=en}}</ref>
It may also be difficult or impossible to ascertain whether a situation meets criteria for success or failure due to ambiguous or ill-defined definition of those criteria. Finding useful and effective criteria, or [[heuristic]]s, to judge the failure or success of a situation may itself be a significant task.
== In American culture == DeVitis and Rich link the success to the notion of the [[American Dream]]. They observe that "[t]he ideal of success is found in the American Dream which is probably the most potent ideology in American life"{{sfn|DeVitis|Rich|1996|p=4}} and suggest that "Americans generally believe in achievement, success, and [[Economic materialism|materialism]]."{{sfn|DeVitis|Rich|1996|p=5}} Weiss, in his study of success in the American psyche, compares the American view of success with [[Max Weber]]'s concept of the [[Protestant work ethic]].{{sfn|Weiss|1969|p=17}} A private opinion survey by the think tank Populace, found that Americans now emphasize secure retirement, financial independence, parenthood and work fulfillment as their American Dream.<ref>{{cite web |title=Success Index: Misunderstanding the American Dream |url=https://ben-a-7aej.squarespace.com/s/Success-Index-Misunderstanding-the-American-Dream |publisher=Populace |access-date=26 September 2024}}</ref>
== In biology == [[Natural selection]] is the variation in successful survival and reproduction of individuals due to differences in [[phenotype]]. It is a key mechanism of [[evolution]], the change in the [[Heredity|heritable]] [[Phenotypic trait|traits]] characteristic of a [[Population (biology)|population]] over generations. [[Charles Darwin]] popularized the term "natural selection", contrasting it with [[selective breeding|artificial selection]], which in his view is intentional, whereas natural selection is not. As Darwin phrased it in 1859, natural selection is the "principle by which each slight variation [of a trait], if useful, is preserved".<ref>{{harvnb|Darwin|1859|p=[http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=F373&viewtype=side&pageseq=76 61]}}</ref> The concept was simple but powerful: individuals best adapted to their environments are more likely to survive and reproduce. As long as there is some variation between them and that variation is [[Heritability|heritable]], there will be an inevitable selection of individuals with the most advantageous variations. If the variations are heritable, then differential [[reproductive success]] leads to a progressive evolution of particular [[Population (biology)|population]]s of a species, and populations that evolve to be sufficiently different eventually become different species.<ref>{{harvnb|Darwin|1859|p=[http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemID=F373&viewtype=text&pageseq=20 5]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Strickberger's Evolution |edition=4th |author1=Hall, Brian K. |author2=Hallgrímsson, Benedikt |publisher=Jones and Bartlett |date=2008 |pages=4–6 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jrDD3cyA09kC&pg=PA4 |isbn=978-0-7637-0066-9 |oclc=796450355}}</ref>
==In education== A student's success within an educational system is often expressed by way of [[Grading in education|grading]]. Grades may be given as numbers, letters or other symbols. By the year 1884, [[Mount Holyoke College]] was evaluating students' performance on a 100-point or [[percentage]] scale and then summarizing those numerical grades by assigning letter grades to numerical ranges. Mount Holyoke assigned letter grades ''A'' through ''E,'' with ''E'' indicating lower than 75% performance. The ''A''–''E'' system spread to [[Harvard University]] by 1890. In 1898, Mount Holyoke adjusted the grading system, adding an ''F'' grade for failing (and adjusting the ranges corresponding to the other letters). The practice of letter grades spread more broadly in the first decades of the 20th century. By the 1930s, the letter ''E'' was dropped from the system, for unclear reasons.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Schinske|first1=Jeffrey|last2=Tanner|first2=Kimberly|date=2014|title=Teaching More by Grading Less (or Differently)|journal=CBE: Life Sciences Education|volume=13|issue=2|pages=159–166|doi=10.1187/cbe.CBE-14-03-0054|issn=1931-7913|pmc=4041495|pmid=26086649}}</ref>
Educational systems themselves can be evaluated on how successfully they impart knowledge and skills. For example, the [[Programme for International Student Assessment]] (PISA) is a worldwide study by the [[Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development]] (OECD) intended to evaluate educational systems by measuring 15-year-old school pupils' scholastic performance on mathematics, science, and reading.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/|title=About PISA|website=OECD PISA|access-date=27 November 2020}}</ref> It was first performed in 2000 and then repeated every three years.
[[Carol Dweck]], a [[Stanford University]] psychologist, primarily researches motivation, personality, and development as related to [[implicit theories of intelligence]], her key contribution to education the 2006 book ''[[Mindset: The New Psychology of Success]].'' Dweck's work presents mindset as on a continuum between fixed mindset (intelligence is static) and growth mindset (intelligence can be developed). Growth mindset is a learning focus that embraces challenge and supports persistence in the face of setbacks. As a result of growth mindset, individuals have a greater sense of free will and are more likely to continue working toward their idea of success despite setbacks.
== In business and leadership== [[Malcolm Gladwell]]'s 2008 book ''[[Outliers (book)|Outliers: The Story of Success]]'' suggests that the notion of the [[self-made man]] is a myth. Gladwell argues that the success of entrepreneurs such as [[Bill Gates]] is due to their circumstances, as opposed to their inborn talent.<ref>{{Cite news|title='Outliers' Puts Self-Made Success To The Test|date=2008-11-18|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97117414|access-date=2020-11-26|work=[[NPR]]|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Cowley|first=Jason|author-link=Jason Cowley (journalist)|date=2008-11-23|title=Review: Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell|url=http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/nov/23/outliers-story-success-malcolm-gladwell|access-date=2020-11-26|work=[[The Guardian]]|language=en}}</ref>
[[Andrew Likierman]], former Dean of [[London Business School]],<ref>[[The Chartered Governance Institute]], [https://www.cgi.org.uk/annual-conference-2021/2021-speakers/sir-andrew-likierman Sir Andrew Likierman], accessed 9 January 2022</ref> argues that success is a relative rather than an absolute term: success needs to be measured against stated objectives and against the achievements of relevant peers: he suggests [[Jeff Bezos]] ([[Amazon (company)|Amazon]]) and [[Jack Ma]] ([[Alibaba Group|Alibaba]]) have been successful in business "because at the time they started there were many companies aspiring to the dominance these two have achieved".<ref>Likierman, A., [https://www-ft-com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/content/84dca832-4e26-11e4-adfe-00144feab7de Sir Andrew Likierman of London Business School on good leaders], published 19 October 2014, accessed 6 November 2021</ref> Likierman puts forward four propositions regarding company success and its measurement:<ref>{{Cite web |last=Allen |first=Susie |title=Researchers found a key reason certain people succeed while others fall behind, and it starts with learning from past mistakes |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/why-people-more-successful-than-others-how-they-did-it-2020-12 |access-date=2023-04-27 |website=Business Insider |language=en-US}}</ref> #There is no single definition of "a successful company" and no single measure of "company success" #Profit and share value cannot be taken directly as measures of company success and require careful interpretation #Judgement is required when interpreting past and present performance #"Company success" reflects an interpretation of key factors: it is not a "fact".<ref>Likierman, A. (2006), "Measuring Company Success", in ''Performance Management: Public and Private''</ref>
== In philosophy of science == [[File:Cmbr.svg|thumb|300px|Graph of cosmic microwave background spectrum measured by the FIRAS instrument on the [[Cosmic Background Explorer|COBE]], the most precisely measured [[black body]] spectrum in nature.<ref name="dpf99"> {{cite conference|last=White|first=M.|date=1999|title=Anisotropies in the CMB|book-title=Proceedings of the Los Angeles Meeting, DPF 99|publisher=[[UCLA]]|arxiv=astro-ph/9903232 |bibcode= 1999dpf..conf.....W }}</ref> The [[standard error of estimation|error bars]] are too small to be seen even in an enlarged image, and it is impossible to distinguish the observed data from the theoretical curve.]] [[Scientific theory|Scientific theories]] are often deemed successful when they make predictions that are confirmed by experiment. For example, calculations regarding the [[Big Bang]] predicted the [[cosmic microwave background]] and the relative abundances of chemical elements in deep space (see [[Big Bang nucleosynthesis]]), and observations have borne out these predictions. Scientific theories can also achieve success more indirectly, by suggesting other ideas that turn out correct. For example, [[Johannes Kepler]] conceived a model of the [[Solar System]] based on the [[Platonic solid]]s. Although this idea was itself incorrect, it motivated him to pursue the work that led to the discoveries now known as [[Kepler's laws of planetary motion|Kepler's laws]], which were pivotal in the development of [[astronomy]] and [[physics]].<ref>{{cite book|first1=R. P. |last1=Olenick |first2=T. M. |last2=Apostol |first3=D. L. |last3=Goodstein |year=1986 |title=[[The Mechanical Universe|The Mechanical Universe: Introduction to Mechanics and Heat]] |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0-521-30429-6 |author-link2=Tom M. Apostol |author-link3=David Goodstein}}</ref>
== In probability== The fields of [[probability]] and [[statistics]] often study situations where events are labeled as "successes" or "failures". For example, a [[Bernoulli trial]] is a random [[Experiment (probability theory)|experiment]] with exactly two possible [[Outcome (probability)|outcomes]], "success" and "failure", in which the probability of success is the same every time the experiment is conducted.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia | last = Papoulis | first = A. | contribution = Bernoulli Trials | title = Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes | edition = 2nd | location = New York | publisher = [[McGraw-Hill]] | pages = 57–63 | year = 1984}}</ref> The concept is named after [[Jacob Bernoulli]], a 17th-century Swiss mathematician, who analyzed them in his ''[[Ars Conjectandi]]'' (1713).<ref>James Victor Uspensky: ''Introduction to Mathematical Probability'', McGraw-Hill, New York 1937, page 45</ref> The term "success" in this sense consists in the result meeting specified conditions, not in any moral judgement. For example, the experiment could be the act of rolling a single [[dice|die]], with the result of rolling a six being declared a "success" and all other outcomes grouped together under the designation "failure". Assuming a fair die, the [[probability of success]] would then be <math>1/6</math>.
== Dissatisfaction with success== Although fame and success are widely sought by many people, successful people are often displeased by their status. Overall, there is a general correlation between success and unhappiness. A study done in 2008 notes that CEOs are depressed at more than double the rate of the public at large, suggesting that this is not a phenomenon exclusive to celebrities.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Barnard |first=Jayne |date=26 May 2008 |title=Narcissism, Over-Optimism, Fear, Anger, and Depression: The Interior Lives of Corporate Leaders |url=https://ssrn.com/abstract=1136888 |journal=University of Cincinnati Law Review}}</ref> Research suggests that people tend to focus more on objective success (ie: status, wealth, reputation) as benchmarks for success, rather than subjective success (ie: self-worth, relationships, moral introspection), and as a result become disillusioned with the success they do have.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Nicholson |first=Nigel |last2=de Waal-Andrews |first2=Wendy |date=March 2005 |title=Playing to win: Biological imperatives, self-regulation, and trade-offs in the game of career success |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.295 |journal=Journal of Organizational Behavior |language=en |volume=26 |issue=2 |pages=137–154 |doi=10.1002/job.295 |issn=0894-3796|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Celebrities in particular face specific circumstances that cause them to be displeased by their success.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}}
== See also ==
* [[Critical success factor]] * [[Customer success]] * [[Probability of success]] * [[Propaganda of success]] * [[Success trap]] * [[Survivorship bias]] * [[Victory]]
==References== {{Reflist}}
== Sources == * {{cite book |last=Darwin |first=Charles |author-link=Charles Darwin |year=1859 |title=On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life |edition=1st |location=London |publisher=[[John Murray (publishing house)|John Murray]] |lccn=06017473 |oclc=741260650 |title-link=On the Origin of Species }} * {{Cite book|last=DeVitis|first=Joseph L|url=https://archive.org/details/successethiceduc0000devi|title=The Success Ethic, Education, and the American Dream|last2=Rich|first2=John Martin|publisher=[[State University of New York Press]]|year=1996|isbn=978-0-585-06057-6|location=Albany, New York|language=en|oclc=42855408|url-access=registration}} * {{Cite book|last=Weiss|first=Richard|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bcK57B98XBcC|title=The American Myth of Success: From Horatio Alger to Norman Vincent Peale|publisher=[[University of Illinois Press]]|year=1969|isbn=978-0-252-06043-4|language=en}}
== Further reading == {{Wiktionary|success}} * {{Cite book|last=Brueggemann|first=John|url=https://archive.org/details/richfreemiserabl0000brue|url-access=registration|title=Rich, Free, and Miserable: The Failure of Success in America|date=2010|publisher=[[Rowman & Littlefield]] |isbn=978-1-4422-0095-1|oclc=659730070}}
{{Authority control}}
[[Category:Social concepts]] [[Category:Sociological terminology]] [[Category:Neuroscience]] [[Category:Management]]