4 ms·
I brought up Good to Great on HN once (re: this exact topic) and got a similar reply. Just because it failed to accurately predict the future doesn't mean ther
by dave_sullivan 14y ago
I brought up Good to Great on HN once (re: this exact topic) and got a similar reply. Just because it failed to accurately predict the future doesn't mean there isn't any valuable information in there. It's certainly not on my top 10 list of best books ever, but it's not on my list of books I wish I'd never read either.
It suggests that some of the best run companies are run by non-charismatic CEOs--I agree with that. Read it and make up your own mind. Or don't, but come off the whole "That book will poison your mind" thing.
- saurik 14y agoTo verify (I have not read the book, and am honestly asking so I can figure out whether I should, based on these comments bringing it up): does the book then have reasons to believe the things it says other than "these are successful companies [apparently false] so let's see how they are run"?
- dave_sullivan 14y agoNot really, because the whole book is premised on the idea that companies that have made this transition were able to do so because of the principals outlined in the book. However, keep in mind that these were all successful companies at one point--they did make that transition from "good" to "great". After, some of them made the transition from "great" to "bankrupt", but that's possibly beside the point. Some of the concepts in the book, like the flywheel--that what appears to be overnight success is actually the result of many small, incremental, largely unnoticed changes--is a good one. Other concepts, not so much. I read a lot of pop business books in college, and I really liked this one. But they're all mental masturbation more or less, so ymmv.