Just finished reading Good To Great by Jim Collins. I've heard about this book for years and I'm ashamed to admit I never got around to reading it.
Unlike Outliers, I was thoroughly impressed with this book.
I'm always interested to see how themes and insights are continually recycled throughout history - the old continually presented as new - but as such, I'm usually let down by most books as they rarely present any new insights. But Good to Great holds enough novel anecdotes and comparative analysis to support the main thesis that it is a very enjoyable and insightful read.
I still would argue that the philosophic works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca or Marcus Aurelius bear as much fruit if not more, although the tenants of stoicism seem to be beyond the grasp of our modern day culture and as such their macro applicability is questionable. What I did like about Good to Great though was how much it aligned with stoic thought and provided evidence to show how such thought was essential to success.
Good to Great is like the story of Goldilocks and the three bears - it's neither too simply nor too complex, neither too theory-ladden nor overly stuff with boring facts and figures - rather, it is just the right balance of empirical support and theoretical modeling, and as such digestible for today's average reader.
It should be essential reading for anyone who is going to work in any organization - as the greater the understanding everyone has of what it takes to be (sustainably) successful, the greater the probability that success will occur.
And from a PR perspective this is an absolute must read. If you want your organization to appear successful, you need to know what the traits of success look like!
While I don't have space to articulate all the insights of Good to Great, I will toss out some highlights that I found refreshing to read (my comments in green)....
* Compared to high-profile leaders with big personalities who make headlines and become celebrities, the good-to-great leaders seem to have come from Mars. Self-effacing, quiet, reserved, even shy-these leaders are a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will. They are more like Lincoln and Socrates than Patton or Caesar. (You'll notice I talk about humility a lot in my blog - mostly as it's a central tenant of stoicism - I enjoyed seeing it as being a central theme in Good to Great)
* Level 5 leaders want to see the company even more successful in the next generation, comfortable with the idea that most people won't even know that the roots of that success trace back to their efforts. (You should always work such that your work can continue on after you leave. What's the point of building anything if it crumbles after you leave? While you can't always ensure its continued success, you should do what you can to try and ensure your work carries on.)
* You must maintain unwavering faith that you can and will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties, AND at the same time have the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be. (Essential a commitment to be honest with yourself about the obstacles you face and then the courage to face them)
* When you have disciplined people, you don't need hierarchy. When you have disciplined thought, you don't need bureaucracy. When you have disciplined action, you don't need excessive controls. When you combine a culture of
discipline with an ethic of entrepreneurship, you get the magical alchemy of great performance. (Everyone should have this on a plaque in their office!)
* If you have the right executives on the bus, they will do everything within their power to build a great company, not because of what they will "get" for it, but because they simply cannot imagine settling for anything less. Their moral code requires building excellence for its own sake, and you're no more likely to change that with a compensation package than you're likely to affect whether they breathe. The good-to-great companies understood a simple truth: The right people will do the right things and deliver the best results they're capable of, regardless of the incentive system. (Kind of puts the whole banking crisis and the erosion of American business in to perspective doesn't it?)
* The good-to-great companies probably sound like tough places to work and they are. If you don't have what it takes, you probably won't last long. But they're not ruthless cultures, they're rigorous cultures. And the distinction is crucial.
To be ruthless means hacking and cutting, especially in difficult times, or wantonly firing people without any thoughtful consideration. To be rigorous means consistently applying exacting standards at all times and at all
levels, especially in upper management. To be rigorous, not ruthless, means that the best people need not worry about their positions and can concentrate fully on their work.
To let people languish in uncertainty for months or years, stealing precious time in their lives that they could use to move on to something else, when in the end they aren't going to make it anyway-that would be ruthless. (Gold - 'nuff said.)
Hedgehog Concept
(Read the book for full detail, but the basic summary is pretty self explanatory from the chart below)
* In dealing with the unions, he said, "If you don't help me out, I'm going to blow your brains out. I'll declare bankruptcy in the morning, and you'll all be out of work." Iacocca produced spectacular results and Chrysler became one of the most celebrated turnarounds in industrial history. (I just loved this quote)
* Those who built the good-to-great companies, however, made as much use of "stop doing" lists as "to do" lists. They displayed a remarkable discipline to unplug all sorts of extraneous junk. (Very buddhist - it's not what you need to learn, it's what you need to unlearn.)
* Mediocrity results first and foremost from management failure, not technological failure...We could make a long list of companies that were technology leaders but that failed to prevail in the end as great companies....Yes, when used right-when linked to a simple, clear, and coherent concept rooted in deep understanding-technology is an essential driver in accelerating forward momentum. (Embrace change or stagnate and die is my motto.)
* Perhaps your quest to be part of building something great will not fall in your business life. But find it somewhere. If not in corporate life, then perhaps in making your church great. If not there, then perhaps a nonprofit, or a community organization, or a class you teach. Get involved in something that you care so much about that you want to make it the greatest it can possibly be, not because of what you will get, but just because it can be done. (Principles of success apply to all areas of life, not just business.)
So all-in-all a great book and worth taking the time to read. You can tell pretty quickly whether or not you're in a 'good' organization or a 'great' organization (or one on its way to being great) by simply asking yourself how your organization stacks up against these principles.
For PR folks, if you find your organization holds very few or none of these principles, strap yourself in and get ready for a bumpy ride unfortunately. If they possess all of these principles then you've struck the mother load and are likely to experience a pretty amazing ride.
Unlike Outliers, I was thoroughly impressed with this book.
I'm always interested to see how themes and insights are continually recycled throughout history - the old continually presented as new - but as such, I'm usually let down by most books as they rarely present any new insights. But Good to Great holds enough novel anecdotes and comparative analysis to support the main thesis that it is a very enjoyable and insightful read.
I still would argue that the philosophic works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca or Marcus Aurelius bear as much fruit if not more, although the tenants of stoicism seem to be beyond the grasp of our modern day culture and as such their macro applicability is questionable. What I did like about Good to Great though was how much it aligned with stoic thought and provided evidence to show how such thought was essential to success.
Good to Great is like the story of Goldilocks and the three bears - it's neither too simply nor too complex, neither too theory-ladden nor overly stuff with boring facts and figures - rather, it is just the right balance of empirical support and theoretical modeling, and as such digestible for today's average reader.
It should be essential reading for anyone who is going to work in any organization - as the greater the understanding everyone has of what it takes to be (sustainably) successful, the greater the probability that success will occur.
And from a PR perspective this is an absolute must read. If you want your organization to appear successful, you need to know what the traits of success look like!
While I don't have space to articulate all the insights of Good to Great, I will toss out some highlights that I found refreshing to read (my comments in green)....
* Compared to high-profile leaders with big personalities who make headlines and become celebrities, the good-to-great leaders seem to have come from Mars. Self-effacing, quiet, reserved, even shy-these leaders are a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will. They are more like Lincoln and Socrates than Patton or Caesar. (You'll notice I talk about humility a lot in my blog - mostly as it's a central tenant of stoicism - I enjoyed seeing it as being a central theme in Good to Great)
* Level 5 leaders want to see the company even more successful in the next generation, comfortable with the idea that most people won't even know that the roots of that success trace back to their efforts. (You should always work such that your work can continue on after you leave. What's the point of building anything if it crumbles after you leave? While you can't always ensure its continued success, you should do what you can to try and ensure your work carries on.)
* You must maintain unwavering faith that you can and will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties, AND at the same time have the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be. (Essential a commitment to be honest with yourself about the obstacles you face and then the courage to face them)
* When you have disciplined people, you don't need hierarchy. When you have disciplined thought, you don't need bureaucracy. When you have disciplined action, you don't need excessive controls. When you combine a culture of
discipline with an ethic of entrepreneurship, you get the magical alchemy of great performance. (Everyone should have this on a plaque in their office!)
* If you have the right executives on the bus, they will do everything within their power to build a great company, not because of what they will "get" for it, but because they simply cannot imagine settling for anything less. Their moral code requires building excellence for its own sake, and you're no more likely to change that with a compensation package than you're likely to affect whether they breathe. The good-to-great companies understood a simple truth: The right people will do the right things and deliver the best results they're capable of, regardless of the incentive system. (Kind of puts the whole banking crisis and the erosion of American business in to perspective doesn't it?)
* The good-to-great companies probably sound like tough places to work and they are. If you don't have what it takes, you probably won't last long. But they're not ruthless cultures, they're rigorous cultures. And the distinction is crucial.
To be ruthless means hacking and cutting, especially in difficult times, or wantonly firing people without any thoughtful consideration. To be rigorous means consistently applying exacting standards at all times and at all
levels, especially in upper management. To be rigorous, not ruthless, means that the best people need not worry about their positions and can concentrate fully on their work.
To let people languish in uncertainty for months or years, stealing precious time in their lives that they could use to move on to something else, when in the end they aren't going to make it anyway-that would be ruthless. (Gold - 'nuff said.)
Hedgehog Concept
(Read the book for full detail, but the basic summary is pretty self explanatory from the chart below)
* In dealing with the unions, he said, "If you don't help me out, I'm going to blow your brains out. I'll declare bankruptcy in the morning, and you'll all be out of work." Iacocca produced spectacular results and Chrysler became one of the most celebrated turnarounds in industrial history. (I just loved this quote)
* Those who built the good-to-great companies, however, made as much use of "stop doing" lists as "to do" lists. They displayed a remarkable discipline to unplug all sorts of extraneous junk. (Very buddhist - it's not what you need to learn, it's what you need to unlearn.)
* Mediocrity results first and foremost from management failure, not technological failure...We could make a long list of companies that were technology leaders but that failed to prevail in the end as great companies....Yes, when used right-when linked to a simple, clear, and coherent concept rooted in deep understanding-technology is an essential driver in accelerating forward momentum. (Embrace change or stagnate and die is my motto.)
* Perhaps your quest to be part of building something great will not fall in your business life. But find it somewhere. If not in corporate life, then perhaps in making your church great. If not there, then perhaps a nonprofit, or a community organization, or a class you teach. Get involved in something that you care so much about that you want to make it the greatest it can possibly be, not because of what you will get, but just because it can be done. (Principles of success apply to all areas of life, not just business.)
So all-in-all a great book and worth taking the time to read. You can tell pretty quickly whether or not you're in a 'good' organization or a 'great' organization (or one on its way to being great) by simply asking yourself how your organization stacks up against these principles.
For PR folks, if you find your organization holds very few or none of these principles, strap yourself in and get ready for a bumpy ride unfortunately. If they possess all of these principles then you've struck the mother load and are likely to experience a pretty amazing ride.
Comments
Post a Comment