Good to Great by Jim Collins

Good to Great is required reading for Presidential Fellows in YU, and I understand why. The book goes through basic concepts that, through research, seem to be integral in creating and sustaining a great company from a good one. Ideas such as these should be integral to people who are on the path to leadership in the Jewish and greater community.

At first glance the study seems to be statistically valid. Collins goes through the study that he did, comparing companies that were similar, but then one shot up in stock prices dramatically over 15 years. It’s actually this fact, that the study seems valid, that I don't think I am going to read books of this kind. There is a major flaw in the research done in this book; a flaw that I feel is made constantly in similar books. While its true that those companies which the study followed did embody the qualities detailed in the book, there is no evidence to say that there aren’t other companies that were not researched did not follow these same guidelines. There are also other companies that have grown without these methods. This is only furthered by what has occurred in the years since the book was released. Companies that were praised consistently in the book have fallen in the market since. Companies like Fannie-Mae and Circuit City are not doing well, and are doing even worse than the general market has been. This seems to imply that the research was to some extent created by using information that was not complete.

These objections to Good to Great seem to be the breaking point for bloggers and reviewers of the book. Those that see this as a problem, write off this book as moneymaking scheme building off Collins’ earlier books. Those that don't see this as a problem love the book. In my view, there is a huge middle ground. While by no means is Good to Great a conclusive method to make a great company. However, there are many things that Good to Great bring out that are at least corollaries of making a good company. The book details many ideas, many of which I will not go through here, but I would like to focus on one of them. The beginning of the book, focuses on the idea of Level 5 leadership. A Level 5 leader is able to focus completely on the company, not falling to nepotism or other factors. (S)he is able to care about the companies needs and doesn't look for his own glory or fame. Good to Great is full of messages like this that, while it does not prove conclusively, should be in our minds when we are trying to take the things we are active in from good to great.

May we all be able to take our own endeavors from a position where they are doing a good job to a great one.

The Pun Also Rises by John Pollack

While this post about the Pun Also Rises is certainly not punctual (I opunned this book months ago), I am writing about this now because of the impuntus of (believe it or not) Linsanity, but I will get to that later.  The book goes through many issues dealing with puns, including their biology, history, nature, and how involved they are in culture. The author, John Pollack, while having been Bill Clinton’s speechwriter for many years, is also a champion from the O’ Henry World Pun Competition that happens every year. One can clearly see this throughout the book, as he throws in many subtle puns throughout the prose. He first discusses how the mind comes up with a pun, showing it not to be a puny matter. Ironically, the word pun has never really had one definition. He shows twelve different types of puns, which he defines in the broadest way of a play on different meanings.

Pollack then goes into the history of puns, which was the part I found most interesting. Punning is extremely old, and has been consistently used ever since. Archeologist have found many carved paintings of pictures that could be perceived two ways. Jesters, writers, and other entertainers have used the device for centuries. Pollack laments, however, that the pun has lost esteem in the eyes of the punblic. People view puns as a pungent odor like a punch in the face, looked upon as a punitive punishment that necessitates a groan or a “Shut up, Sam!” (For those that understand). This is the part that I, to an extent, disagree with Pollack. While its certainly true that people do wish to punish people who pun with a punt, when they have a chance to, these same people feel no reason to be punctilious about not punning. And, this is where I bring in Linsanity.

Ever since Jeremy Lin came on the scene, he has gotten the Knicks on their limprobable linning streak, pundits Lin the sports arena, and many others on social media sites have been saying a seemingly linfinite amount of puns with the name Lin. Linsanity has lindividually linaugurated a linformal pun extravaganza (see here) that go from linadequate or linappropriate to lincredible. But why were these funny? Don't they deserve a groan? While at this point, this reaction has started to come out of the fact that it has been overdone, many people that had hated puns before felt fine doing it lin this context. And, that would be precisely my argument. People love to pun, and when it is culturally acceptable they will certainly oblige. It is only when there is a seemingly common punderstanding that puns deserve a groan that they get that reaction. Why this has happened, I do not know, but I feel certain that pun hating has been created by general society, but it is not a true reaction of the individual.  Perhaps it is a jelousy of those that have a punchant for it, but I really don’t know. What do you think? (Leave comments below).

The Pun also Rises was a great read for those that love puns and word play (everyone?). It gave me a better understanding of what punning is and its place in society. I would definitely recommend.

P.S. Did you catch any of the ten Lin puns? Because if not, no pun lin ten did.

The Fragile Species by Lewis Thomas

In the Fragile Species, Lewis Thomas gives a truly unique view of biology, medicine, and science in general, written in a fantastic prose style. He looks at certain factors in the fields of biology and medicine in a historical fashion, viewing what we have now in context of the larger historical framework. Unlike other fields, we always seem to have a huge trust in what science we know right now. Especially those that are less knowledgeable in the fields, it always seems like we as a community have constantly unveiled the hidden parts of the universe. Thomas is wary of this hubris. He shows not only how much we don't understand, especially in the realm of disease, but he also shows how this hubris has been proven to be misplaced time and time again. For a long time, bloodletting was the way doctors believed they could cure. Eventually, the scientific community figured out that these practices were in fact doing more harm than good. Thomas is afraid that we are having a similar understanding now. If we feel that we have come to the apex of human understanding we lack the capacity to move forward effectively.

            This theme of human hubris flowed throughout much of the book. We are a fragile species that in many respects are just part of the world. History, in the broadest sense, has shown this time and time again. For the religious person, this is a mightily important idea. We should understand that even though we have a huge capacity, we are humble in the face of G-d. At the same time, this is important in a secular level as well. The understanding of our place in the broad context of the world is important for each of us to see the opinions of others and move forward as a people. It helps us to not take things too seriously when they aren’t important. For some reason, I have been seeing recently more and more of this type of overreaction. Whether it is about Rav Bina or in one of the YU papers, people have been making more controversy than warranted (perhaps, some things do in fact need to change). Many times this stems from an extremism that comes from a lack of humility about one’s opinions. Feel free to disagree.

            Thomas then moves on to topics of how we live together, by looking at the general animal kingdom. He tries to prove the thesis that animals that show the ability to work together have the ability to survive throughout the history of the world. While I don't think he is able to prove it in the empirical sense, he lends much support to the idea through different animals that have thrived or failed with this characteristic. Within any community, this idea should be just as true. Our ability to cooperate with each other will eventually determine to what extent we are able to thrive.

Lewis Thomas writes about important topics, looking at them through a different lens. He writes about these topics in a way that is easy to read and easily accessible. I would definitely recommend Thomas’ writings.

                                                        Next Week: Good to Great