Evaluating of “In Search of Excellence ”
Evaluating of “In Search of Excellence ”
1. In my opinion research which was made by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman upon which was written book Search of excellence was not objective. Main reasons why I claim this research was not objective is that Peters and Waterman: - Found 72 firms which appeared to be excellent. There is no mention about method which was used in selection of these firms and there are not determined criteria. I would suggest that they should set up some general criteria and apply them on majority of firms in researched field. - From these 72 firms were chosen 62 to represent sample of research. Again there is no mention about criteria and methods used in this step. - I think quantitative criteria used in last selection of 43 firms were not sufficient and selects just above- average firms not the excellent ones. For me there is also determination what excellent is according to Authors. - Authors did not made equal interviews to all firms which made cut of 43, these firms were divided into two groups of 22 and 21 for no reason. According to me to authors should question firms which did not make the cut to 43 and then compare results. - They did not reveal substance and structure of interviews. This reveals that there was no serious research made to get some valuable results. Then results has no common reference which could prove that chosen firms had any special qualities that made them “excellent”.
2. Findings of this research are in my opinion very generalized and do not say anything about real qualities that companies do need to have. According to me it is general knowledge and without reasoning and pointing to real problems it has no real value. Findings should be based on examples and case studies which shows qualities of excellent firms. 3. I think facts that it is in nature of every businessman that he/she wants to succeed, names of big firms mentioned in this book, popular science format which does not include too much statistic and
1. In my opinion research which was made by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman upon which was written book Search of excellence was not objective. Main reasons why I claim this research was not objective is that Peters and Waterman: - Found 72 firms which appeared to be excellent. There is no mention about method which was used in selection of these firms and there are not determined criteria. I would suggest that they should set up some general criteria and apply them on majority of firms in researched field. - From these 72 firms were chosen 62 to represent sample of research. Again there is no mention about criteria and methods used in this step. - I think quantitative criteria used in last selection of 43 firms were not sufficient and selects just above- average firms not the excellent ones. For me there is also determination what excellent is according to Authors. - Authors did not made equal interviews to all firms which made cut of 43, these firms were divided into two groups of 22 and 21 for no reason. According to me to authors should question firms which did not make the cut to 43 and then compare results. - They did not reveal substance and structure of interviews. This reveals that there was no serious research made to get some valuable results. Then results has no common reference which could prove that chosen firms had any special qualities that made them “excellent”.
2. Findings of this research are in my opinion very generalized and do not say anything about real qualities that companies do need to have. According to me it is general knowledge and without reasoning and pointing to real problems it has no real value. Findings should be based on examples and case studies which shows qualities of excellent firms. 3. I think facts that it is in nature of every businessman that he/she wants to succeed, names of big firms mentioned in this book, popular science format which does not include too much statistic and