marketing

Why certain firms, showing do performances rather medium take off suddenly to join the platoon of head? What differentiates them of their competitors? And can they spread in others the principles from which it draws inspiration? During five years, Jim Collins and his team of researchers tackled this vast question to bring to light the secret of the conversion to the excellence. Eleven firms, kept for their the very upper stock exchanges performances in those of their sector, have been compared to their competitors.

This book presents the meticulous work of several years of research of Jim Collins and his fifteen researchers in management.

This book consists of six main stages:

Level 5 Leadership

First Who… Then What

Confront the Brutal Facts (Stockdale Paradox)

Hedgehog Concept (The Three Circles)

Culture of Discipline

Technology Accelerators   Flywheel, Not Doom Loop

 According to them, the main reasons of the passage to the excellence are, in summary:

Level 5 Leadeship

Five levels of leadership exist:

At the level 1, the individual is highly capable; he has the talent, knowledge, a good habit of work. At level 2, the individual is a contributing member of a team. He brings his capacities to the group and works efficiently to make live the group. Then at level 3 the manager is competent. It manages the persons and organizes means towards chase efficient of objectives. At level 4, the leader is real. He requires an engagement on behalf of all these employees, of the vigour in the action, a stimulation of the performances. The objective of level 5 is to BUILT of "the great" which lasts, through a paradoxical mixture of personal humility and determination for its firm. The leaders of type 5 are terrifically ambitious, but their ambition is first orientated to the institution and not to themselves.

First Who… Then What

The leaders of very good firms started their course by caring first of putting the good persons in the bus (and by getting outside those who had nothing in miss there), and only then wonder where to go. They can fit so to the changing world, they can change direction; and the problem to motivate the persons becomes secondary. Soon because of this chapter not on you the idea of having the good persons in the team, it is that the questions of whom are treated before decisions of the "what", that is those of vision, strategy, organization of structure, tactics. First "which", then “what”, this with absolute rigour and constancy.

Confront the Brutal Facts

All excellent companies started their path toward their success while confronting itself to the reality of their situation. When you start with an honest and diligent effort to determinate the truth of you situation, the right decisions often become self-evident. It is impossible to make good decisions without infusing the entire process with an honest confrontation of the brutal facts. It is necessary to create an environment of monitoring so that the truth ended up being sensible. Creating a climate where the truth is heard involves four basic practises:

Lead with questions, not answers.

Engage in dialogue and debate, not coercion

Conduct autopsies, without blame

Build red flag mechanisms that turn information into information that cannot be ignored.

A key psychology for leading from good to great is the Stockdale Paradox: Retain absolute faith that you can and will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties, and at the same time confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.

The Hedgehog Concept

Are you a hedgehog or a fox?

The three circles of the hedgehog are a simple and limpid concept that permits to pass the good to the great:

What you can be the best in the world at

What drives your economic engine

What you are deeply passionate about

It is necessary that these three circles are simultaneously present so that the concept functions. This concept is not a contest to be the best, a strategy to be the best, an intention to be the best, a plan to be the best. It is to understand some OF what you can be the best. This differentiation is absolutely crucial. If you cannot be the best in the world at your core business, then your core business cannot form the basis of your Hedgehog Concept. The “best in the world” understanding is a much more severe standard than a core competence. Good to great companies set their goals and strategies based understanding; comparison companies set their goals and strategies based on bravado. Getting the Hedgehog Concept is an iterative process. The Council can be a useful device.

A Culture of Discipline

How to create a culture of discipline?

It starts with disciplined people, of people auto-disciplined in the bus, to the first place; then one has then a manner to think disciplined: to confront themselves to the realities, and to keep the certainty to become excellent. It is necessary to be in total adherence with the three circles of the hedgehog. Bureaucratic cultures arise to compensate for incompetence and lack of discipline, which arise from having the wrong people on the bus in the fist place. A culture of discipline involves a duality. On the one hand, it requires people who adhere to a consistent system; yet, on the other hand, it gives people freedom and responsibility within the framework of that system. A culture of discipline is not just about action. The single most important form of discipline for sustained results is fanatical adherence to the Hedgehog Concept and the willingness to shun opportunities that fall outside the three circles.

Technology Accelerators

Good to great organizations think differently about technology and technological change than mediocre ones. It avoids technology fads and bandwagons, yet they become pioneers in the application of carefully selected technologies. It used technology as an accelerator of momentum, not a creator of it. You could have taken the exact same leading-edge technologies pioneered at the good to great companies and handed them to their direct comparisons for free, and the comparisons still would have failed to produce anywhere near the same results. How a company reacts to technological change is a good indicator of its inner drive for greatness versus mediocrity. Great companies respond with thoughtfulness and creativity, driven by a compulsion react and lurch about, motivated by fear of being left behind.

Let's compare the book "Good to Great" written by Jim Collins and the school manual "Management" of Stephen P. Robbins and Mary Coulter.

In a first time, we notice that the book of Jim Collins is essentially centred for a professional public, for firms, managers. As for the book "Management", it is destined to the students learning the management. These are the theoretical bases of a good manager that are described on this one.  Besides, "Good to Great" is written to the first person of the singular "I". It leaves on lived experiences. Besides, this book explains that one only and unique theory to be a good manager. On the contrary, the book "Management" heads toward several theories.

To conclude this point, we can say that "Good to Great" is a book of reference for the great firms. As for "Management" it is centred for the firms said comparisons.

Now pass, to the leadership of the level 5. In "Good to Great", the 5 levels are the next one:

Highly Capable Individual

Contributing Team Member

Competent Manager

Effective Leader

Level 5 Executive

Here, there is that only one boss. One doesn't absolutely speak to us some under-leaders. In "Management", the managers are classified in three categories:

First-line Managers

There are individuals who manage the work on non-managerial employees.

Middle Managers

There are individuals who manage the work of first-line managers.

Top Managers

There are individuals who are responsible for making organization-wide decisions and establishing plans and goals that affect the entire organization.

Let's lean ourselves on "First who. then what." To Jim Collins an employee's recruitment makes itself before the strategy, the vision, the structure and the tactics of the firms. The major point is that the "that" comes before the "what." It entails a rigorous company applied with consistency. Good to Great teams consist of people who debate vigorously to reach the best answers, yet who actually unify behind decisions, regardless of parochial interests.

In the chapter 12 of "Management", to recruit a person, 3 stages exist:

Job Analysis

An assessment that defines a job and the behaviors necessary to perform the job.

Job description

A written statement of what the job holder does, how is done, and why it is done.

Job specification

A written statement of the minimum qualifications that a person must possess to perform a given job successfully.

Here, one determines then before the station, the profile, one searches for the person qualified for the use.

With regard to, the Confront chapter the Brutal Facts of "Good to Great" and the chapter 8, Strategic Management, of "Management" we note that the approach is similar. The only difference is the manner to explain the concept. In the first, a key psychology for leading from good to great is the Stockdale Paradox: Retain absolute faith that you can and will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties, AND at the same time confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be. In the second book, there are several concepts as The strategy Formulation @ Mariott with environmental analysis (opportunities and threats) and organizational analysis (strengths and weaknesses). There is also the BCG Matrix, developed by the Boston Consulting Group. It considers market share and industry growth rate. It classifies firms as cash cows (low growth rate, high market share), stars (high growth rate, high market share), question marks (high growth rate, low market share) and dogs (low growth rate, low market share). There are the Five Competitive Forces: Threat of New Entrants, Threat of Substitutes, Bargaining Power of Buyers, Bargaining Power of Suppliers and Current Rivalry.

For the Concept of the Hedgehog, “Good to Great” takes as a basis on three important circles with regard to the strategy:

What you can be the best in the world at

What drives your economic engine

What you are deeply passionate about

Jim Collins explains us well that  knowing this concept of the Hedgehog is an iterative process for which the Council can prove to be a precious tool.
In the other book, strategies of important Management are the following:

In the other book the strategies of important Management are the following:

It results in higher organizational performance

It requires that managers examine and adapt to business environment changes

It coordinates diverse organizational units, helping them focus on organizational goals.

It is very much involved in the managerial decision-making process.

The difference of strategy is that one is carried on a physical person and the other on an organization. 

To the level of the discipline culture. Both books explain that it is necessary to have a rigorous culture. It is above all about recruiting the disciplined people that will enter into a disciplined then reflection will undertake a disciplined action. In the second book, one speaks to us "strong cultures" that is-to-say values widely shared. The culture consistent messages about what’s important. Most employees can tell stories about their company's history…

Finally, the technology accelerators; the “Good to Great” explains us that the key question about any technology is, Does the technology fit directly with you Hedgehog Concept? If yes, then you need do become pioneer in the application of that technology. If no, then you can settle for parity or ignore entirely. In the book "Management", it is the entire contrary. It is necessary to be to the performance of the new technology.

To conclude, we can say that these two books are passionate. One shows us the theoretical approach and the bases of the management. The other, takes precise examples and to more of receding as for the management. Indeed, it takes in examples of the firms.