Shortfalls and Negative Issues of Jim Collins Good to Great - Book Report/Review Example

Shortfalls and Negative Issues of Good to GreatJim Collins’ masterpiece “Good to Great” is certainly one of the most widely read book in the business world. Drawing from experiences of 11 companies, Collins belabors to explain some key principles that are essential to transforming a company from “Good” to “Great”. A random glimpse through the chapters of the book gives the reader a feeling of greatness even before practically rolling out the strategies suggested therein. In other words, the author skillfully uses his writing skills to create a feeling of possibility for every manager who desires to transform their companies into peak performance.

The reality on the ground, however, contradicts some of the author’s suggestion. In this critical review, I discuss the short falls and negative issues of “Good to Great”.To begin with, Collins’ tendency to generalize and apply his research outcomes on the universal platforms is somehow nonsensical. The study by itself is biased in the sense that Collins focused on just a few Fortune 500 companies. This study analyzed 11 companies that transited from good to great against 11 peer companies that failed to transit within the same period.

Judgment was made based on the increase in stock returns. The negative issue with this study is that it is limited to only a small section of the universe. A company listed in Fortune 500 companies is already an established, well branded, and relatively successful by nature. Assuming that start-up, or rather mid-sized company will follow the same trajectory as the companies used in the study is absolutely unrealistic. Companies at different levels of growth face various challenges that and limit the universal application of Collins suggestions.

Another shortfall of Collins’ book is that he fails to explain the reason why some of the companies he considered great had started underperforming even before his book was published. An analysis of most of the 11 companies 10 years after Collins’ research (2010) point at a rather sorry scenario where most of them are struggling to survive at peak performance. For instance, Abbott Laboratories has hardly experienced further growth stock, Circuit City became bankrupt, while Fannie Mae was placed under conservatorship.

This unfolding simply point to the fact that Collins’ opinion could have been valid only at that time period. In other words, as time progress and economic conditions vary, what could have worked at some period may lead to total failure when applied in another period. In this respect, the question that current readers of “Good to Great” book try to answer is why Collin’s Great companies are underperforming when they formed a perfect example at some past time. Did they deviate from strategies that gave them competitive advantage then?

While Collins points out at some great qualities that a Level 5 leader should possess, he grossly fails to show the concrete steps that would assist in helping leaders to evolve into Level 5 executives. This is attributed to the fact that the book only explains what such leaders are. The characteristics of a level five leader, whom Collins suggested has greatest chance of transiting their company to greatness, are almost unattainable. These qualities are of a perfect person who is not prone to any flaws.

Also, while a particular leadership style may be suitable for, let us say service industry, any effort to apply the same leadership style in a manufacturing industry may prove very fatal. The style of leadership employed majorly depends on the nature of the business as well as followers. Therefore, assuming that a particular leadership style is universally applicable is a fallacy. ReferenceCollins, J. C. (2001). Good to Great. New York, NY: Harperbusiness.