Often we hear about back-up plan IF our original plan fails. Plan B is a good idea, it helps you to reduce deviation from expected results if Plan A fails. Yet, many of us fail to see how Plan B can be avoided. If the failure of original plan can be attributed to uncontrollable external factors (like political turmoil or forex shocks), then the existence of Plan B is justified. However, if Plan B is required because of our own expected faults (weak infrastructure or failure of mission-critical equipment or process), then we are very much prone to have a final luck with Plan B at the end. We have designed ourselves to have a Plan B because we know we ultimately need this. Isn’t this a non-competitive thinking in this age of competition? Aren’t we unnecessarily exposing ourselves to higher risks of non-performance by not working towards capitalizing on strengths and reducing weaknesses?
If this is the reason we need Plan B, then this should have been our Plan A!