Scan barcode
jsammichve's review against another edition
5.0
Absolutely amazing book. Truly inspiring to hear about companies you may notice on a shelf that you may barely remember, that have truly grown amazing businesses. It really gives insight into how an amazing company runs.
lorenewescott's review against another edition
5.0
For some reason, goodreads is only allowing me to rate 1 star. I really want 4.5 stars
toddlleopold's review against another edition
3.0
I read Jim Collins’ “Good to Great” because it was a huge bestseller when it came out in 2001, and I was curious to see a) what made for a good-to-great company; and b) if the companies in the book had maintained their greatness.
Well, the ensuing two decades haven’t been kind to many of the 11 companies profiled in the book.
Circuit City went bankrupt. Fannie Mae was caught in the 2008 financial crisis and was eventually delisted. Gillette is still a great name in personal grooming, but now it’s no longer an independent name, but part of an even bigger company, Procter & Gamble. Pitney Bowes, maker of postage meter technology, was trading at about $80 when the book was published; the stock is now in the single digits. Wells Fargo – well, you know what happened to Wells Fargo.
So what happened? Were these companies never great to begin win? Was the definition of “great” – in which Collins focused largely on financials but not so much on culture or especially worker satisfaction – too narrow?
It’s hard to say. Business is always changing, of course; there was no guarantee that business leaders who read the book and aimed at improving their lot would find greatness simply based on Collins’ anecdotal observations. His principles, which include “Level 5” leadership (a combination of focus and humility), truth-telling, and discipline, could simply serve as traps as much as jumping-off points.
“Good to Great” has faltered, I think, because Collins generally used financial success as a proxy for greatness. He wanted to find out how companies that had been muddling along suddenly surged, with their stock value handily beating the market over the course of at least 15 years (without Enron-type chicanery) while their competitors kept muddling – or spiked, only to fall back. So even though he brings up other factors, success ends up coming back to the bottom line. Other aspects of greatness -- working conditions, employee treatment, corporate culture – seem secondary.
Of course, I can’t help but be skeptical. I’ve read too many “Dilbert” collections. I’m not a big consumer of business books, but it seems that Collins wrote “Good to Great” with rose-colored glasses; not for him the no-bullshit tone of my favorite business book, “Up the Organization,” where Avis rejuvenator Robert Townsend described the way things too often are at large corporations. (Summary: The lower-level employees are ignored, even though they’re on the front lines. Townsend is big on communication and fair treatment, one reason I like his book so much.)
Also, I wish Collins had discussed greed more. He notes greed IS a factor at poorly run companies, such as former Nucor competitor Bethlehem Steel, in which Collins describes -- with justifiable sneers -- its monumental office building and cushy executive perks. I used to be able to see the building from my house before it was imploded last year, a vestige of a once-great company.
But in today’s era (and even the ‘90s, when Collins was compiling his research), greed is a big deal. We live in a world where, more than ever, the idea is to come up with a killer app, build up to an IPO, make a few people rich, create a dazzling C-suite, and take over competitors. Or simply play vulture. Wall Street likes those double-digit profit margins instead of steady success, Warren Buffett notwithstanding. So is there even a place for Collins' brand of greatness?
In fairness, even if some of the book seems anachronistic, I did find things to like in “Good to Great.” Look past the model companies, and the principles – though common sense – still hold up. Don’t spend your profits on an edifice complex. Be honest about your problems. And don’t get caught up in celebrity culture: “The recent spate of boards enamored with celebrity CEOs … is one of the most damaging trends for the long-term health of companies,” Collins wrote 19 years ago.
Still, good companies would do these things anyway. Right?
I hope so. We could use just as many good companies as “great” ones.
Well, the ensuing two decades haven’t been kind to many of the 11 companies profiled in the book.
Circuit City went bankrupt. Fannie Mae was caught in the 2008 financial crisis and was eventually delisted. Gillette is still a great name in personal grooming, but now it’s no longer an independent name, but part of an even bigger company, Procter & Gamble. Pitney Bowes, maker of postage meter technology, was trading at about $80 when the book was published; the stock is now in the single digits. Wells Fargo – well, you know what happened to Wells Fargo.
So what happened? Were these companies never great to begin win? Was the definition of “great” – in which Collins focused largely on financials but not so much on culture or especially worker satisfaction – too narrow?
It’s hard to say. Business is always changing, of course; there was no guarantee that business leaders who read the book and aimed at improving their lot would find greatness simply based on Collins’ anecdotal observations. His principles, which include “Level 5” leadership (a combination of focus and humility), truth-telling, and discipline, could simply serve as traps as much as jumping-off points.
“Good to Great” has faltered, I think, because Collins generally used financial success as a proxy for greatness. He wanted to find out how companies that had been muddling along suddenly surged, with their stock value handily beating the market over the course of at least 15 years (without Enron-type chicanery) while their competitors kept muddling – or spiked, only to fall back. So even though he brings up other factors, success ends up coming back to the bottom line. Other aspects of greatness -- working conditions, employee treatment, corporate culture – seem secondary.
Of course, I can’t help but be skeptical. I’ve read too many “Dilbert” collections. I’m not a big consumer of business books, but it seems that Collins wrote “Good to Great” with rose-colored glasses; not for him the no-bullshit tone of my favorite business book, “Up the Organization,” where Avis rejuvenator Robert Townsend described the way things too often are at large corporations. (Summary: The lower-level employees are ignored, even though they’re on the front lines. Townsend is big on communication and fair treatment, one reason I like his book so much.)
Also, I wish Collins had discussed greed more. He notes greed IS a factor at poorly run companies, such as former Nucor competitor Bethlehem Steel, in which Collins describes -- with justifiable sneers -- its monumental office building and cushy executive perks. I used to be able to see the building from my house before it was imploded last year, a vestige of a once-great company.
But in today’s era (and even the ‘90s, when Collins was compiling his research), greed is a big deal. We live in a world where, more than ever, the idea is to come up with a killer app, build up to an IPO, make a few people rich, create a dazzling C-suite, and take over competitors. Or simply play vulture. Wall Street likes those double-digit profit margins instead of steady success, Warren Buffett notwithstanding. So is there even a place for Collins' brand of greatness?
In fairness, even if some of the book seems anachronistic, I did find things to like in “Good to Great.” Look past the model companies, and the principles – though common sense – still hold up. Don’t spend your profits on an edifice complex. Be honest about your problems. And don’t get caught up in celebrity culture: “The recent spate of boards enamored with celebrity CEOs … is one of the most damaging trends for the long-term health of companies,” Collins wrote 19 years ago.
Still, good companies would do these things anyway. Right?
I hope so. We could use just as many good companies as “great” ones.
jeffgrann's review against another edition
4.0
Helped me understand some puzzling previous interactions I've had with executives. I'd say there are some fine points here (who first, hedgehog, flywheel), but cloaking this book as universal principles derived from empirical analysis is too much.
davemmett's review against another edition
5.0
Glad I finally got around to reading this - it's been on my bookshelf for about 3 years.
Reading through some of the comments that others have left on this book, there seems to be a "yeah, but it's just common sense" attitude to a lot of the advice and analysis from this book (obviously, every company wants to hire great people). But the critical concept that I took away is the idea of Discipline, and how critical it is to be disciplined in your actions if you want to be great.
All companies want to hire great people, but most aren't willing to let go of the merely good people to make way for the great. Many companies want to work towards something more than money, but most aren't willing to stop doing the profitable things that are distracting them from that mission. Most companies want to understand the real reason for their failures, but few are willing to listen honestly to their team/customers to uncover the root causes.
I also really enjoyed the section on the role that technology plays in great companies, it connects very well with the ideas from [b:The Innovator's Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth|2618|The Innovator's Solution Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth|Clayton M. Christensen|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1408345956s/2618.jpg|138639].
Reading through some of the comments that others have left on this book, there seems to be a "yeah, but it's just common sense" attitude to a lot of the advice and analysis from this book (obviously, every company wants to hire great people). But the critical concept that I took away is the idea of Discipline, and how critical it is to be disciplined in your actions if you want to be great.
All companies want to hire great people, but most aren't willing to let go of the merely good people to make way for the great. Many companies want to work towards something more than money, but most aren't willing to stop doing the profitable things that are distracting them from that mission. Most companies want to understand the real reason for their failures, but few are willing to listen honestly to their team/customers to uncover the root causes.
I also really enjoyed the section on the role that technology plays in great companies, it connects very well with the ideas from [b:The Innovator's Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth|2618|The Innovator's Solution Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth|Clayton M. Christensen|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1408345956s/2618.jpg|138639].
sebarose's review against another edition
1.0
How do great companies like Circuit City and Fannie Mae become and stay great while companies like GE and At&t just slog along? Circuit City and Fannie Mae are awesome and fantastic and are sure to be companies we look to far into the future for their management and business wisdom. Oh wait.
Hindsight aside, I couldn't finish the book because level five leadership skills (level one to four are not defined - save that level one vodka is required to read the book) in the three circles of success functioning on the flywheel and not the doom loop hut hutting to the hedgehog principle of the engineered DNA of success are innate gene-based, scientifically researched, learned behaviors!
In other words, the entire thing is hogwash coded into meaningless catch phrases and sold as deep thoughts. The book talked me into buying some Circuit City stock, though.
Hindsight aside, I couldn't finish the book because level five leadership skills (level one to four are not defined - save that level one vodka is required to read the book) in the three circles of success functioning on the flywheel and not the doom loop hut hutting to the hedgehog principle of the engineered DNA of success are innate gene-based, scientifically researched, learned behaviors!
In other words, the entire thing is hogwash coded into meaningless catch phrases and sold as deep thoughts. The book talked me into buying some Circuit City stock, though.
taracanread's review against another edition
5.0
Loved this book. So much applicable information. Making a note to read it again down the road.