The article left me with the impression that he was acquiring companies in order to acquire qualified engineers (and, likely, clients) while finding efficiencie

The article left me with the impression that he was acquiring companies in order to acquire qualified engineers (and, likely, clients) while finding efficiencies by reducing the number of managers. Presumably there will be room for growth as long as there are companies to acquire, but it will suffer from diminishing returns. Replicating his approach would be difficult since it is based upon the premise that engineers are actually creating value for the company and acknowledges that management is a cost centre. That seems to be diametrically opposed to the culture of many businesses. (That's not to dismiss the value of managers since they are necessary for the operation of a business. It's simply a recognition that clients pay for the engineer's product, rather than the management's labour.)