This is a transplant from the original Irrational Exuberance, and was written in mid 2007: nearly two years ago.
I recently started readingGood to Great由Jim Collins，到目前为止，我认为它是一个很棒的阅读。它写得很好，很好地流动，并具有有趣的观点。阅读其关于5级领导层的章节，也是以下一章“谁不是什么”，它让我开始画一些平行。这个博客条目是一个简要讨论我画的那些相似之处，我认为该条目的内容可能最好被描述为伪哲学的徒劳的尝试。
为了直接削减到这一点，我所做的第一个连接是Paul Graham对他能够（相对）的评论很容易提出一笔款项，只要创始人是“正确的”的人。我所做的第二个连接是，这种“正确”的人的概念是灵活的，可以移动山脉 - 这个人的质量较少关于培训和技能以及更多关于某种无定形的善良（强烈的道德和标准感） - 在AYN RAND的作品中，尤其是阿特拉斯耸了耸肩（但肯定也存在于喷头内）。
Who are the “right” kind of people?
The right kind of people are those who are focused on helping your organization thrive, and are more interested in doing (or being a part of) something great than in their personal well-being. In
Good to Great they are extremely motivated individuals who set for themselves extraordinarily high standards. When placed into positions of power they infuse their organization with those high standards, and (as
很好的伟大喜欢说的是乘坐公共汽车上的合适的人，以及错误的人离开公共汽车（哦，他们确保每个人都在公交车上的右座位！）。这些人被其他类似地“伟大”的人包围是强烈的动机。在我的个人经历中，这些是我遇到的学生，他们在与其他人一起努力完成以优雅的解决方案的努力完成努力任务时，他们都会受到启发。我偶尔希望我曾经参加过更为耻的机构的单一原因是希望在优秀学校的这些高度动机和优秀的人有更高的配额（也许这是一个误导的期望）。虽然，我记得，一位聪明的老师一旦说，我参加过任何学校会有伟大的教师，但这是学生机构的质量，这些人都会有所不同。Paul Graham's“hackers”, orRand’s“Free Electrons”; they are autotelic (self-directed, or deriving meaning from the activity they are engaged in, not working to live, but working for work’s sake), they are driven, they are good, they are “right.” Oh, and they are modest too. Not an easy standard to live up to, if I do say so myself.So draw this connection to Paul Graham for us
Okay, its kind of tenuous, I acknowledge, but my basic idea is that the hackers Paul Graham talks about are these “right” people. One of the points of从优秀到卓越< / em >是你需要right people, and then you decide where to lead your companyafter getting those people. To have an incredible strategy along with an innovative idea won’t be enough to get your company off the ground, unless you have great people to implement it.Thus the connection is that Paul Graham seems to be intuitively (or perhaps very intentionally) following this rule: get great people, worry about steering the boat later. When I first read Graham’s statement about being certain about being able to find a money making idea if he had the right founders, I was pretty hesitant. Indeed, I found the statement to come off as slightly arrogant. After reading more of his works, and of a number of other books and articles (and also monitoring the success of the Y-Combinator companies), it seems more and more that what he said is true: with the right people, the boat may as well steer itself.Alright, now weave Ayn Rand into this web for us
If we look at the heroes in Ayn Rand’s novels, they are all extremely competent, driven by a need to conform to incredibly high standards, and exceptionally selfless (and they are all men, because Ayn Rand believed women existed to worship men, which is pointedlynot an argument ever made by either Paul Graham or Jim Collins; on aslightly different note thePassions of Ayn Randis a great book and I recommend it to everyone).Rand’s heroes deeply desire to work with one another (as evidenced by their joint retreat to form their own country at the end of Atlas Shrugged), and they are eternally frustrated when working with others who are not the “right” kind. Dorothy Taggert finds the one competent lineworker, and desperately attempts to promote him into a position of authority; she does this because she knows theGood to Great secret, that the “right” people are going to be “right” regardless of any current skills, they’ll pick up the training, but the “wrong” people will never pick up the attitude and standards.Ending Thoughts
This has admittedly been a fairly disjoint article, the connections simply jumped into my head earlier today while reading, and have now leaped from my head onto these pages. Hopefully now that I have put it out there, I will receive some interesting feedback. Initially I wanted to connectMihaly Csikszentmihalyiinto the web, but I realized thatConnect是really tenuous, and mostly the consequence of my enduring interest in his work (rather than the result of a strong parallel of concepts, although the autotelic concept–so finely honed by Mihaly–is prevalent in Good to Great).I really would recommend anyone to read throughGood to Great, its a pleasant read, and probably wouldn’t take more than 4-8 hours to read, depending on your reading speed (its about 240 pages, but not particularly dense or difficult reading).