Good To Great Analysis
Good to Great
Jim Collins's Good to Great seems to derive findings from market instances of which he and his team were able to minimize or even eliminate any market-specific factors in order to compare the chosen companies by level of similarities that brought them through the process to 'great' success. As the chosen companies that achieved 'greatness' were compared to a similar comparison company that did not make the correct choices towards creating a 'great' company, Collins and his team were able to develop the Build up to Breakthrough Flywheel. While I believe that following the flywheel process can result in improvements in any business, this is still only the theoretical application that was derived from case studies in the past …show more content…
By viewing choices this way, CEOs can produce results that always have the organization's health in mind. On the flip side, Level 4 leaders who haven't realized the benefits of this perspective are stuck at the 'ego-centric' stage in which they make many choices that provide themselves with personal gain by through (mostly indirect) sacrifices by the organization. The example of Bank of America captures this trend quite well, however, it does not take into consideration the flux of regulation to deregulation and back that promotes these types of practices. It is only natural for this to occur when an industry (such as banking) requires heavy regulation in its early stages in order to become stable. Once companies grow large enough, the regulations that were created to protect them are now employed to create advantages for the upper management. Overall, this Level 5 leadership rule is just another way of saying that you need a conscientious leader that cares more about the company than
Jim Collins's Good to Great seems to derive findings from market instances of which he and his team were able to minimize or even eliminate any market-specific factors in order to compare the chosen companies by level of similarities that brought them through the process to 'great' success. As the chosen companies that achieved 'greatness' were compared to a similar comparison company that did not make the correct choices towards creating a 'great' company, Collins and his team were able to develop the Build up to Breakthrough Flywheel. While I believe that following the flywheel process can result in improvements in any business, this is still only the theoretical application that was derived from case studies in the past …show more content…
By viewing choices this way, CEOs can produce results that always have the organization's health in mind. On the flip side, Level 4 leaders who haven't realized the benefits of this perspective are stuck at the 'ego-centric' stage in which they make many choices that provide themselves with personal gain by through (mostly indirect) sacrifices by the organization. The example of Bank of America captures this trend quite well, however, it does not take into consideration the flux of regulation to deregulation and back that promotes these types of practices. It is only natural for this to occur when an industry (such as banking) requires heavy regulation in its early stages in order to become stable. Once companies grow large enough, the regulations that were created to protect them are now employed to create advantages for the upper management. Overall, this Level 5 leadership rule is just another way of saying that you need a conscientious leader that cares more about the company than