Ive been reading a book by Ozan Varol, it has proved hard to put down and raised several interesting concepts. 

A problem the book attempts to answer is the question of 'trying to think outside the box'. A saying many people talk about but few achieve. 

• Some solutions to given problems were to allow a mixing of ideas from different unrelated business departments. An issue may have already been solved elsewhere. Also Innovent working practices can  be transferable. 
• The way a problem is presented can limit the solutions that are suggested. For instance if you lock your keys in the car and your given possible solutions of breaking the lock or getting a new set of keys, you overlook the idea of just calling a cab and solving the issue when you have more time. It all comes down to presentation. 

But it was the ideas about constantly questioning yourself that got my attention. For me, what the book championed was the idea of failure. Everyone fails but few talk about it. In everyday life as well as work people learn from their mistakes, but few question the benefits of it.  From my understanding   its based on the saying  'the known-knowns, known-unknowns and unknown-unknowns. A 'known-known' to me, would be would be the procedures in place to undertake a task. You already know that something has to be done so you plan for it. Then you have the 'known unknowns', where a mistake happens which, although unfortunate, can be dealt with reasonably well. But the big things are the unknown unknowns. You weren't expecting it and there's no plan in place to deal with it. These occurrences are normally dealt with silently and with little fan fare. The book comes up with a unique perspective, don't encourage failure and don't run from it, instead use it as a learning tool. How well was the problem dealt with? is the problem transferable? , meaning can you copy the fix into other procedures and possibly save much more time/money in the long run. One of the biggest issues industry has, especially in the current climate is dealing with unknown unknows. 

Another interesting concept is to constantly question and seek ways to destroy what you have created, in that way you can discover unknown unknowns 'inhouse' . A problem that can be planed for is dealt with much better 'in house' - than in real time or worse,  leaving it as an unknown - unknown.

Also when things go right ask yourself just how successful were you? Was there luck involved and can you improve on the progress made. Just because it works, doesn't mean it can't be improved upon.