Good to Great: Chapter 9 Summary & Analysis

Collins turns his attention to bringing the good-to-great concepts together with the ideas outlined in his previous book, Built to Last, which examined companies’ long-term greatness. He notes that he and the research team decided to conduct the good-to-great research as if the previous book did not exist, in order to avoid biasing the results.

However, looking back after completing the two studies, Collins points out several significant relationships between them. He states that Good to Great turned out to be a kind of prequel to Built to Last, in that it shows how to first achieve the greatness that the companies in the earlier book sustain. One key connection is that the early leaders of the companies studied in Built to Last seemed to follow good-to-great principles when building the companies. For example, Collins describes how Walk-Mart (one of the Built to Last companies) clearly developed a Hedgehog Concept in order to create momentum through a flywheel process. Similarly, Hewlett Packard and other Built to Last companies often had consummate Level 5 Leaders at the times of their success.

Collins also points to the idea of “core ideology” as a notable link between the two studies. Most of the Built to Last companies had a sense of purpose and mission outside the goal of making money. These values varied widely from company to company, but simply the fact of having them seems to be crucial nonetheless. Collins relates these deep ideologies to the good-to-great concept of passion as one of the three circles that create effective Hedgehog Concepts.

Collins goes on to recap the core concepts of Built to Last and lists how they line up with each of the good-to-great concepts. He also focuses in more detail on the connection between Hedgehog Concepts and the Built to Last concept of the BHAG: Big Hairy Audacious Goal. The previous book was not able to explain why some BHAGs are better than others. However, Collins draws on the good-to-great concepts to conclude that understanding based on the three circles are the key foundation of good BHAGs, while bad BHAGs are based on bravado rather than insight. He gives the example of Boeing’s entry into commercial aircraft production as an example of creating a good BHAG based on deep understanding. While the manifestation of the three circles of understanding might change over time, the company’s reliance on them does not.

Collins concludes with the statement that creating “an enduring great company requires all the key concepts from both studies.” In other words, building and sustaining greatness requires consistent application of every principle, without any lapses. Collins notes that ultimately, achieving greatness is easier than maintaining it.

Finally, Collins uses an anecdote about a school track team to illustrate the overall purpose of greatness as it might apply to any organization. He notes that “it is no harder to build something great than to build something good,” and that much of what simply good organizations do is a waste of time and energy. Even the track team manages to improve performance through the simple use of a clear Hedgehog Concept that helps everyone be more focused and engaged. In this case and others, Collins argues, a commitment to greatness relieves burdens rather than adding to them. Additionally, Collins points out that focusing on greatness will lead individuals to pursue work that motivates them to be great, whereas focusing on just being “good enough” keeps people engaged in work they don’t really care about. “When all these pieces come together,” Collins notes, “not only does your work move toward greatness, but so does your life.”