Title: Good to Great
Author: Jim Collins
Reviewed Format: Hardcover
Pages: 260
Rating: 5 Stars
Review: This is a great book. I went in a little skeptical... When everyone talks about how great a book is (and when the executive office of your employer is said to carry it around in their uh... knapsacks?) it always makes me question the hype and take a closer look than I maybe otherwise would. Great expectations, and all that. Well, this is a great book, but I'm not sure how many people actually get the message when they read the thing based on my own conversations with and observations of people who tout its message.
Jim Collins and a team of 20 other researchers affiliated with the University of Colorado Graduate School with the stated mission of studying companies which had established a baseline of merely good results (market average) but suddenly underwent some kind of seemingly major transformation and became great companies that sustained results for at least 15 years after the transformation event. The team made a very conscious decision to ignore their own biases and preconceptions and try to analyze their data and findings objectively-- what they found shocked them (and me).
I think the collective "we" (Jim Collins, et al., included) imagined that they'd find companies helmed by rockstar CEOs, radical transition plans, excellent management of said transition, and drastic transformations. What they found instead-- and in EVERY ONE of their eleven subjects (the only found eleven companies that met their good-to-great criteria)-- was that the transformation was actually a very starting one that gained more and more momentum as the becoming-great company pushed on their figurative flywheel (one of the books central concept). The book has seven chapters each about a specific concept, but several of them really cover a lot of the same ground and I would say there's really three central lessons to be had from this book. They are:
1. Level 5 Leadership - humble leaders who direct all of their sizable ambition towards building a great company... And hire people like them with a focus on values instead of on skills. (The book categorizes these as "disciplined thought.")
2. Hedgehog Concept - understand what your company can be great at and focus only on those things. Do not tolerate people who don't understand this or what it implies. (The book categorizes these as "disciplined action.")
3. A Culture of Discipline - When you've worked on the above to concepts the next part should be easy, but is essentially a business culture that becomes determined or even fanatic about hiring the right kind of people for the job and adhering to the Hedgehog Concept.
What it all really boils down to, is getting the right people on the bus AND the wrong people off the bus and the rest of it will tend to fall in place. Of course the book itself has numerous examples and data to support the findings of the research teams' findings and is well enough written to be a clear and easy read. The attribute I found most compelling was the fact that the research turned up the same factors and steps for every one of their subject companies so as far as data goes it was extremely clear to me that they are really on to something. As I consider the actions and performance of the company I work for, it has become impossible to view them without constantly evaluating them against the findings of this book. I very highly recommend this book for anyone interested in what makes some companies great. (5 stars)
Showing posts with label books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label books. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Book Review: Guns, Germs, and Steel
Title: Guns, Germs,and Steel
Author: Jared Diamond
Reviewed Format: Trade Paperback
Pages: 471
Rating: 4 Stars
Review: I came into reading this book with very high expectations and finished just a little bit underwhelmed. I'd seen the impressive PBS miniseries of the same name narrated by Jared Diamond himself, so I was familiar with the premise, and had several enthusiastic recommendations from people whose opinions I trust. Perhaps the bar I set was a little too high, but either way, while I liked the book it didn't quite satisfy me. Guns, Germs, and Steel also won a Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction, for whatever that's worth.
The book is an impressive collection of information supporting Jared Diamond's theories on why it came to pass that Eurasian civilization dominated the modern world in terms of power, wealth, and technology. His theory is pretty strongly deterministic, meaning that on the very large scale environmental/geographical factors allowed people to get a leg up on their neighbors because of where they were as opposed to who they are. I, personally, think (and have thought for most of my adult life) that this makes a great deal of sense. In my own travels I've never come to the conclusion that people are physically or mentally different in any significant way. In terms of proving his point in the very broadest terms, particularly during pre-historical times, Diamond does a great job of making his point.
The book itself is laid out as a series of thought experiments where Diamond posits something and then thinks his way through them given known historical, archaeological, and linguistic factors. He begins (and often returns) to Polynesia and New Guinea as interesting test cases-- situations where racially/ethnically identical people end up in different environments and alternatively regress, stay the same, or prosper significantly. The historical details themselves are fascinating and make the book worth reading, no matter what you think of his conclusions. For all of his though experiments, save one (his theory on the development of government and complex social systems), Diamond was convincing enough to sway my thinking his way.
Stylistically, Diamond is a decent writer. I didn't have to re-read sentences or paragraphs too often, and I thought the level of granularity in his historical examples were sufficient to make his point without overburdening the reader. Diamond also had the integrity to point out the weaknesses in his theories or findings throughout the book and detailing the opposing points of view so that the reader could decide which point of view they preferred.
So that was all pretty positive, right? Why didn't I give this book five stars? I guess it's because I really didn't get anything out of it. I agreed with his point of view concerning the rise of civilizations in antiquity before I read the book, but was curious to see how he would determine why European powers rather than China came to dominate the modern world... And he mostly shied away from it. I'm not sure it's entirely fair to criticize because I'm not sure the mechanisms Diamond is describing (very broad strokes of the evolution of civilizations) can be realistically applied to specific countries over relatively short periods of time. In any case, if the topic interests you even a little, I must recommend this book. (4 stars)
Author: Jared Diamond
Reviewed Format: Trade Paperback
Pages: 471
Rating: 4 Stars
Review: I came into reading this book with very high expectations and finished just a little bit underwhelmed. I'd seen the impressive PBS miniseries of the same name narrated by Jared Diamond himself, so I was familiar with the premise, and had several enthusiastic recommendations from people whose opinions I trust. Perhaps the bar I set was a little too high, but either way, while I liked the book it didn't quite satisfy me. Guns, Germs, and Steel also won a Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction, for whatever that's worth.
The book is an impressive collection of information supporting Jared Diamond's theories on why it came to pass that Eurasian civilization dominated the modern world in terms of power, wealth, and technology. His theory is pretty strongly deterministic, meaning that on the very large scale environmental/geographical factors allowed people to get a leg up on their neighbors because of where they were as opposed to who they are. I, personally, think (and have thought for most of my adult life) that this makes a great deal of sense. In my own travels I've never come to the conclusion that people are physically or mentally different in any significant way. In terms of proving his point in the very broadest terms, particularly during pre-historical times, Diamond does a great job of making his point.
The book itself is laid out as a series of thought experiments where Diamond posits something and then thinks his way through them given known historical, archaeological, and linguistic factors. He begins (and often returns) to Polynesia and New Guinea as interesting test cases-- situations where racially/ethnically identical people end up in different environments and alternatively regress, stay the same, or prosper significantly. The historical details themselves are fascinating and make the book worth reading, no matter what you think of his conclusions. For all of his though experiments, save one (his theory on the development of government and complex social systems), Diamond was convincing enough to sway my thinking his way.
Stylistically, Diamond is a decent writer. I didn't have to re-read sentences or paragraphs too often, and I thought the level of granularity in his historical examples were sufficient to make his point without overburdening the reader. Diamond also had the integrity to point out the weaknesses in his theories or findings throughout the book and detailing the opposing points of view so that the reader could decide which point of view they preferred.
So that was all pretty positive, right? Why didn't I give this book five stars? I guess it's because I really didn't get anything out of it. I agreed with his point of view concerning the rise of civilizations in antiquity before I read the book, but was curious to see how he would determine why European powers rather than China came to dominate the modern world... And he mostly shied away from it. I'm not sure it's entirely fair to criticize because I'm not sure the mechanisms Diamond is describing (very broad strokes of the evolution of civilizations) can be realistically applied to specific countries over relatively short periods of time. In any case, if the topic interests you even a little, I must recommend this book. (4 stars)
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Book Review: The Three Signs of a Miserable Job
Title: The Three Signs of a Miserable Job
Author: Patrick Lencioni
Reviewed Format: Hardcover
Pages: 256
Rating: 3 1/2 Stars
Review: I was asked to read this book as a part of a book club at work. This is my first review of a book that isn't necessarily designed as entertainment. As "the plot" isn't really the focus of the book, and it's not likely that I could spoil the experience for a prospective reader by letting the cat out of the proverbial bag. So get ready, cat's on the way and what not.
The subtext to the title is "A Fable for Managers (and their employees)," and that would indicate the book is most likely about trying to keep your employees happy and effective as they execute their jobs. As I am currently a non-supervisory management employee, it means that I read it from the "other side" (though it's not like I wouldn't like to be a manager of people one day) and tried to evaluate if I thought Mr. Lencioni's ideas put into practice would improve my opinion of my management or not.
The book starts of with the fictional story of one Brian Bailey, a successful businessman with humble roots. He started off in operations and climbed the ladder over time before finding himself the CEO of a mid-sized exercise equipment manufacturer. The industry enters into a consolidation mode and Brian decides to sell the company off and retire. He and his wife retire to Lake Tahoe and he gets bored and a little depressed without work. Long story short, he visits an Italian restaurant that's a little down on its luck and he ends up not only thinking through its problems, but meets with the owner and via that discussion ends up invested directly in the business.
The story from that point on serves as a vehicle for Lencioni to deliver his message. His point is that most people tend to think a job is a happy job when the employee is able to do something they love and get paid enough (or even a lot) money to do it. He suggests this model is at best flawed as there are numerous examples of famous athletes, actors, models, and musicians getting paid large sums of money to do what they love and still very unhappy. His theory is that there are three flaws common to jobs, each of which can make a person miserable: immeasurability (the author notes, as I do, that this wasn't a word until he made it so), irrelevance, and anonymity. This boils down to the idea that an employee needs to be able to measure how he makes people's lives better (immeasurability/irrelevance) and not be just a number in a phone book (anonymity).
The "fable" itself is written well enough. It's simple, with prose designed for maximum readability. I feel it'd be disingenuous to criticize Lencioni on his writing as he was absolutely able to deliver his intended message. There was even one night that the book turned into a little bit of a page-turner for me. The message itself I feel a little mixed on. There's no science to the fable... It's all pretty "soft," and Mr. Lencioni certainly wasn't going to write a story that didn't prove his point. That said, he was convincing enough in his arguments that I've found myself using some of the language in my conversations at work and interested to at least test some of it out. I'm not sure they're the absolute answer of making your employees happy, but I also very much doubt you'd make people unhappy by getting to know them and helping them understand how they help people get through their lives. It also points out something that I think is a lesson that should appear in every text for a manager: the job responsibilities of a manager of professionals do include results, but their primary function is to cause their group of professionals to perform effectively and efficiently.
A third of the way through this book, I was ready to put it down and forget about it, but I just got over the hump. I'm glad I did. It's an easy read, and it's going to help get a manager's mind focused on managing his people. From an employee's perspective, it might equip you with some concepts and vocabulary with which to train your boss and make your world a little better. Mr. Lencioni's written several other books, and I've picked out which I'll be reading next: Silos, Politics and Turf Wars. (3 1/2 Stars)
Author: Patrick Lencioni
Reviewed Format: Hardcover
Pages: 256
Rating: 3 1/2 Stars
Review: I was asked to read this book as a part of a book club at work. This is my first review of a book that isn't necessarily designed as entertainment. As "the plot" isn't really the focus of the book, and it's not likely that I could spoil the experience for a prospective reader by letting the cat out of the proverbial bag. So get ready, cat's on the way and what not.
The subtext to the title is "A Fable for Managers (and their employees)," and that would indicate the book is most likely about trying to keep your employees happy and effective as they execute their jobs. As I am currently a non-supervisory management employee, it means that I read it from the "other side" (though it's not like I wouldn't like to be a manager of people one day) and tried to evaluate if I thought Mr. Lencioni's ideas put into practice would improve my opinion of my management or not.
The book starts of with the fictional story of one Brian Bailey, a successful businessman with humble roots. He started off in operations and climbed the ladder over time before finding himself the CEO of a mid-sized exercise equipment manufacturer. The industry enters into a consolidation mode and Brian decides to sell the company off and retire. He and his wife retire to Lake Tahoe and he gets bored and a little depressed without work. Long story short, he visits an Italian restaurant that's a little down on its luck and he ends up not only thinking through its problems, but meets with the owner and via that discussion ends up invested directly in the business.
The story from that point on serves as a vehicle for Lencioni to deliver his message. His point is that most people tend to think a job is a happy job when the employee is able to do something they love and get paid enough (or even a lot) money to do it. He suggests this model is at best flawed as there are numerous examples of famous athletes, actors, models, and musicians getting paid large sums of money to do what they love and still very unhappy. His theory is that there are three flaws common to jobs, each of which can make a person miserable: immeasurability (the author notes, as I do, that this wasn't a word until he made it so), irrelevance, and anonymity. This boils down to the idea that an employee needs to be able to measure how he makes people's lives better (immeasurability/irrelevance) and not be just a number in a phone book (anonymity).
The "fable" itself is written well enough. It's simple, with prose designed for maximum readability. I feel it'd be disingenuous to criticize Lencioni on his writing as he was absolutely able to deliver his intended message. There was even one night that the book turned into a little bit of a page-turner for me. The message itself I feel a little mixed on. There's no science to the fable... It's all pretty "soft," and Mr. Lencioni certainly wasn't going to write a story that didn't prove his point. That said, he was convincing enough in his arguments that I've found myself using some of the language in my conversations at work and interested to at least test some of it out. I'm not sure they're the absolute answer of making your employees happy, but I also very much doubt you'd make people unhappy by getting to know them and helping them understand how they help people get through their lives. It also points out something that I think is a lesson that should appear in every text for a manager: the job responsibilities of a manager of professionals do include results, but their primary function is to cause their group of professionals to perform effectively and efficiently.
A third of the way through this book, I was ready to put it down and forget about it, but I just got over the hump. I'm glad I did. It's an easy read, and it's going to help get a manager's mind focused on managing his people. From an employee's perspective, it might equip you with some concepts and vocabulary with which to train your boss and make your world a little better. Mr. Lencioni's written several other books, and I've picked out which I'll be reading next: Silos, Politics and Turf Wars. (3 1/2 Stars)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)