If it’s worth doing, it’s worth doing great!

I’ve recommended Jim Collins’ Good to Great before. Once in reference to Scrum—and once on the subject of estimates—but I thought the book might be worth summarizing for you wannabe leaders who are too busy to read.

To understand Jim’s thinking, first ask yourself: what goes into a company's transformation from mediocre to excellent?

Using volumes of data, Jim and his team compared and categorized three types of companies:

• Those that went from “Good to Great” and are still growing

Companies like Abbott, Circuit City, Fannie Mae, Gillette, Kimberly-Clark, Kroger, Nucor, Philip Morris, Pitney Bowes, Walgreens, and Wells Fargo produced and sustained great results, evolving into companies that would be around for the long haul.

• Those that directly compare with “Good to Great” companies

Upjohn, Silo, Great Western, Warner-Lambert, Scott Paper, A&P, Bethlehem Steel, RJ Reynolds, Addressograph, Eckerd, and Bank of America are companies in the same industries with the same resources and opportunities as “Good to Great” companies, but they demonstrated no obvious leap in performance.

• Those that looked great for awhile

Burroughs, Chrysler, Harris, Hasbro, Rubbermaid, and Teledyne are companies that made a short-term shift from good to great but failed to maintain growth.

Through careful comparisons of the three groups, Jim’s team identified 23 principals “Good to Great” companies followed that the others did not:

1. Ten out of eleven Good to Great company leaders or CEOs came from the inside. They were not outsiders hired in to save the company. They were either people who worked many years at the company or were members of the family that owned the company.
2. Strategy per se did not separate the good to great companies from the comparison groups.
3. Good to Great companies focus on what Not to do and what they should stop doing.
4. Technology has nothing to do with the transformation from good to great. It may help accelerate it, but is not the cause of it.
5. Mergers and acquisitions do not cause a transformation from good to great.
6. Good to Great companies paid little attention to managing change or motivating people. Under the right conditions, these problems naturally go away. 
7. Good to Great transformations did not need any new name, tagline, or launch program. The leap was in the performance results, not a revolutionary process.
8. Greatness is not a function of circumstance; it is clearly a matter of conscious choice.
9. Every Good to Great company had Level 5 leadership during pivotal transition years. Level 1 is defined as a Highly Capable Individual. Level 2 is a Contributing Team Member. Level 3 is the Competent Manager. Level 4 is an Effective Leader. Level 5 is the Executive who builds enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will.
10. Level 5 leaders display a compelling modesty, are self-effacing and understated. In contrast, two thirds of the comparison companies had leaders with gargantuan personal egos that contributed to the demise or continued mediocrity of the company. 
11. Level 5 leaders are fanatically driven, infected with an incurable need to produce sustained results. They are resolved to do whatever it takes to make the company great, no matter how big or hard the decisions.
12. One of the most damaging trends in recent history is the tendency (especially of boards of directors) to select dazzling, celebrity leaders and to de-select potential Level 5 leaders.
13. Potential Level 5 leaders exist all around us, we just have to know what to look for.
14. The research team was not looking for Level 5 leadership, but the data was overwhelming and convincing. The Level 5 discovery is an empirical, not ideological, finding.
15. Before answering the “what” questions of vision and strategy, ask first “who”
    are the right people for the team. 
16. Comparison companies used layoffs much more than the good-to-great companies. Although rigorous, the good-to-great companies were never ruthless and did not rely on layoffs or restructuring to improve performance.
17. Good to Great management teams consist of people who debate vigorously in search of the best answers, yet who unify behind decisions, regardless of parochial interests.
18. There is no link between executive compensation and the shift from good to great. The purpose of compensation is not to ‘motivate' the right behaviors from the wrong people, but to get and keep the right people in the first place.
19. The old adage “People are your most important asset” is wrong. People are not your most important asset. The right people are.
20. Whether someone is the right person has more to do with character and innate capabilities than specific knowledge, skills or experience.
21. The Hedgehog Concept is a concept that flows from the deep understanding of the answers to the following three questions:
    • Realistically, what can you be the best in the world at and what can you not be best in the world at?
    • What drives your economic engine?
    • What you are deeply passionate about?
22. Discover your core values and purpose beyond simply making money and combine this with the dynamic of preserve the core values – stimulate progress, as shown for example by Disney. They have evolved from making short animated films, to feature length films, to theme parks, to cruises, but their core values of providing happiness to young and old, and not succumbing to cynicism remains strong.
23. Enduring great companies don't exist merely to make money. In a truly great company, profits and cash flow are absolutely essential for life, but they are not the very point of life.

In my opinion, the 21st item may be the biggest secret Jim has uncovered.

Think about it. The other items may be the effect with the Hedgehog Concept as the cause. If you are doing anything that you care deeply about—and you truly believe in it—it’s impossible to imagine not trying to make it great.